Progress: Awaiting committee decision
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | JURI | RADEV Emil ( EPP) | REPASI René ( S&D), DIEPEVEEN Ton ( PfE), PIPEREA Gheorghe ( ECR), TOOM Jana ( Renew), PETER-HANSEN Kira Marie ( Greens/EFA), SAEIDI Arash ( The Left) |
Former Responsible Committee | JURI | ||
Committee Opinion | ECON | REPASI René ( S&D) | |
Former Committee Opinion | ECON | Georgios KYRTSOS ( RE), Frances FITZGERALD ( PPE), Chris MACMANUS ( GUE/NGL) | |
Former Committee Opinion | IMCO |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
T, r, e, a, t, y, , o, n, , t, h, e, , F, u, n, c, t, i, o, n, i, n, g, , o, f, , t, h, e, , E, U, , T, F, E, U, , 1, 1, 4
Legal Basis:
T, r, e, a, t, y, , o, n, , t, h, e, , F, u, n, c, t, i, o, n, i, n, g, , o, f, , t, h, e, , E, U, , T, F, E, U, , 1, 1, 4Subjects
Events
PURPOSE: to harmonise certain corporate insolvency rules across the EU, making them more efficient and helping promote cross-border investment.
PROPOSED ACT: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.
BACKGROUND: insolvency laws ensure the orderly winding down of companies in financial and economic distress. They are considered as one of the key factors in determining the cost of financial investments, as they allow to establish the final recovery value of investment in insolvent companies.
Insolvency rules are fragmented along national lines. As a result, they deliver different outcomes across Member States, and in particular they have different degrees of efficiency in terms of the time it takes to liquidate a company and the value that can eventually be recovered. In some Member States, this leads to lengthy insolvency procedures and a low average recovery value in liquidation cases. Differences in national regimes also create legal uncertainty as regards the outcomes of insolvency proceedings and lead to higher information and learning costs for cross-border creditors compared to those who only operate domestically
The lack of harmonised insolvency regimes has long been identified as one of the key obstacles to the freedom of capital movement in the EU and to greater integration of the EU’s capital markets
Action at EU level is needed to substantially reduce the fragmentation of insolvency regimes. Measures at EU level would ensure a level playing field and avoid distortions of cross-border investment decisions caused by lack of information about and differences in the designs of insolvency regimes. This would help to facilitate cross-border investments and competition while protecting the orderly functioning of the single market
This initiative is part of the Commission’s priority to advance the Capital Markets Union (CMU), a key project to further financial and economic integration in the European Union.
CONTENT: the Commission aims to reduce differences in national insolvency laws and hence address the issue of more inefficient insolvency laws in some Member States, increasing the predictability of insolvency proceedings in general and lowering obstacles to the free movement of capital. By harmonising targeted aspects of insolvency laws, the proposal aims, in particular, to maximise the recovery of value from the insolvent company for creditors. More uniform insolvency laws should thus expand the choice of funding available to companies across the Union.
Specific provisions of the proposal
This proposal targets the three key dimensions of insolvency law: (i) the recovery of assets from the liquidated insolvency estate; (ii) the efficiency of proceedings; and (iii) the predictable and fair distribution of recovered value among creditors.
It provides for:
- minimum set of harmonised conditions for exercising avoidance actions to protect the insolvency estate from illegitimate withdrawals of assets made prior to the commencement of insolvency proceedings;
- strengthening asset traceability through improved access by insolvency practitioners to asset registers, including in a cross-border setting;
- provisions to introduce so called ‘pre-pack’ liquidation procedures (i.e. where the sale of the business is agreed before the insolvency begins);
- provisions on a duty of directors to timely file for insolvency to avoid potential asset value losses for creditors;
- simplified liquidation procedure for insolvent microenterprises;
- requirements for improving the representation of creditors’ interests in the proceedings through creditors’ committees;
- enhanced transparency for creditors on the key features of national insolvency regimes, including on the rules governing insolvency triggers and the ranking of claims.
Budgetary implications
This proposal has implications in terms of costs and administrative burden for the Commission. These costs and burden stem from the obligation to create a system interconnecting national electronic auction systems via the European e-Justice Portal. Based on experience with other e-Justice Portal interconnection projects, the implementation costs for the Commission are estimated to be EUR 1.75 million for the current long-term budget (Multiannual Financial Framework). The additional costs will be covered through redeployment within the Justice programme.
Legislative proposal
PURPOSE: to harmonise certain corporate insolvency rules across the EU, making them more efficient and helping promote cross-border investment.
PROPOSED ACT: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.
BACKGROUND: insolvency laws ensure the orderly winding down of companies in financial and economic distress. They are considered as one of the key factors in determining the cost of financial investments, as they allow to establish the final recovery value of investment in insolvent companies.
Insolvency rules are fragmented along national lines. As a result, they deliver different outcomes across Member States, and in particular they have different degrees of efficiency in terms of the time it takes to liquidate a company and the value that can eventually be recovered. In some Member States, this leads to lengthy insolvency procedures and a low average recovery value in liquidation cases. Differences in national regimes also create legal uncertainty as regards the outcomes of insolvency proceedings and lead to higher information and learning costs for cross-border creditors compared to those who only operate domestically
The lack of harmonised insolvency regimes has long been identified as one of the key obstacles to the freedom of capital movement in the EU and to greater integration of the EU’s capital markets
Action at EU level is needed to substantially reduce the fragmentation of insolvency regimes. Measures at EU level would ensure a level playing field and avoid distortions of cross-border investment decisions caused by lack of information about and differences in the designs of insolvency regimes. This would help to facilitate cross-border investments and competition while protecting the orderly functioning of the single market
This initiative is part of the Commission’s priority to advance the Capital Markets Union (CMU), a key project to further financial and economic integration in the European Union.
CONTENT: the Commission aims to reduce differences in national insolvency laws and hence address the issue of more inefficient insolvency laws in some Member States, increasing the predictability of insolvency proceedings in general and lowering obstacles to the free movement of capital. By harmonising targeted aspects of insolvency laws, the proposal aims, in particular, to maximise the recovery of value from the insolvent company for creditors. More uniform insolvency laws should thus expand the choice of funding available to companies across the Union.
Specific provisions of the proposal
This proposal targets the three key dimensions of insolvency law: (i) the recovery of assets from the liquidated insolvency estate; (ii) the efficiency of proceedings; and (iii) the predictable and fair distribution of recovered value among creditors.
It provides for:
- minimum set of harmonised conditions for exercising avoidance actions to protect the insolvency estate from illegitimate withdrawals of assets made prior to the commencement of insolvency proceedings;
- strengthening asset traceability through improved access by insolvency practitioners to asset registers, including in a cross-border setting;
- provisions to introduce so called ‘pre-pack’ liquidation procedures (i.e. where the sale of the business is agreed before the insolvency begins);
- provisions on a duty of directors to timely file for insolvency to avoid potential asset value losses for creditors;
- simplified liquidation procedure for insolvent microenterprises;
- requirements for improving the representation of creditors’ interests in the proceedings through creditors’ committees;
- enhanced transparency for creditors on the key features of national insolvency regimes, including on the rules governing insolvency triggers and the ranking of claims.
Budgetary implications
This proposal has implications in terms of costs and administrative burden for the Commission. These costs and burden stem from the obligation to create a system interconnecting national electronic auction systems via the European e-Justice Portal. Based on experience with other e-Justice Portal interconnection projects, the implementation costs for the Commission are estimated to be EUR 1.75 million for the current long-term budget (Multiannual Financial Framework). The additional costs will be covered through redeployment within the Justice programme.
Legislative proposal
Documents
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- ESC: CES5781/2022
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- EDPS: OJ C 089 10.03.2023, p. 0010
- EDPS: N9-0018/2023
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2022)0396
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SEC(2022)0434
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2022)0395
- Legislative proposal: COM(2022)0702
- Legislative proposal: Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2022)0702
- Legislative proposal published: Go to the page Eur-Lex
- Legislative proposal: COM(2022)0702 Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex SWD(2022)0396
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex SEC(2022)0434
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex SWD(2022)0395
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- Contribution: COM(2022)0702
- EDPS: OJ C 089 10.03.2023, p. 0010 N9-0018/2023
- ESC: CES5781/2022
Amendments | Dossier |
108 |
2022/0408(COD)
2023/09/12
ECON
108 amendments...
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article shall not apply to workers’ claims. The law applicable to these claims shall be determined in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation 593/2008 (Rome I).
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive Article 28 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the acquirer acquires the debtor’s business or part thereof
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive Article 28 – paragraph 1 a (new) Liability for the clean-up of environmental impacts shall not be excluded from the acquisition.
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive Article 29 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that appeals against decisions of the court relating to the authorisation or execution of the sale of the debtor’s business or part thereof may have suspensive effects only subject to the provision by the appellant of a security that is adequate to cover the potential damages caused by the stay of the realisation of the sale. This provision does not apply to trade unions or workers’ representatives representing workers in the debtor’s business or part thereof.
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive Article 30 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the criteria to select the best bid in the pre-pack proceedings
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a directive Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a (a) they disclose in a timely manner to the monitor, the creditors, and to the court their relation to the debtor;
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new) (aa) the purchase of the asset can be shown to be at fair value;
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a directive Article 34 a (new) Article 34a Protection of the interests of third parties and the environment 1. Member States shall ensure that the cost for the remeditation of potential environmental damage, if any, within the responsibility of the debtor or on premises owned or occupied by the debtor, shall be assessed and considered as a claim on the debtor to be compensated alongside other creditors. 2. The cost of such environmental remediation, if required, shall be financed through the insolvency estate.
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive Article 36 – title Duty to
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive Article 36 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that, where a
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive Article 36 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that, where a legal entity becomes insolvent, its directors are obliged to
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive Article 37 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that a failure to comply with the obligation laid down in Article 36 renders the insolvent legal entity’s directors
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a directive Article 37 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the insolvent legal entity’s directors are liable for damages incurred by creditors and workers as a result of their failure to comply with the obligation laid down in Article 36.
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive Article 37 – paragraph 2 2. Paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to national rules on civil liability
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive Title VI Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive Article 38 – title Rules on winding-up of microenterprises and SMEs
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a directive Article 38 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive Article 38 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a directive Article 39 – paragraph 1 – introductory part Member States shall ensure that
Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a directive Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) the debtor
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point b (b)
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that insolvent microenterprises and SMEs can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings to a competent authority.
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall ensure that any creditor of an insolvent microenterprise or SME can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings against the
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall ensure that microenterprises and SMEs can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings using a standard form.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 4 Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point a (a) if the microenterprise or SME is a legal person, the debtor’s name, registration number, registered office or, if different, postal address;
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point b (b) if the microenterprise or SME is an entrepreneur, the debtor’s name, registration number, if any, and postal address or, where the address is protected, the debtor's place and date of birth;
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point c (c) a list of the assets of the microenterprise or SME;
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point d (d) name, address or other contact details of creditors of the microenterprise or SME, as known to the
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point e (e) the list of the claims against the microenterprise or SME and, for each claim, its amount specifying the principal and, where applicable, interest and the date on which it arose and the date on which it became due, if different;
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 6 6. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor, and the microenterprise expressed its consent to the opening of the proceedings, the microenterprise is required to submit the
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 6 6. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor, and the microenterprise or SME expressed its consent to the opening of the proceedings, the
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 7 7. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor and the competent authority opens such proceedings despite the microenterprise contesting or not responding to the request the microenterprise is required to submit the
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 7 7. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor and the competent authority opens such proceedings despite the microenterprise or SME contesting or not responding to the request the
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) the debtor is not a microenterprise or SME;
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall ensure that the microenterprise, SME or any creditor of the
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a directive Article 43 – paragraph 4 Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a directive Article 46 – paragraph 1 Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a directive Article 48 – paragraph 2 (2) The assets of the insolvency estate shall include assets
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive Article 48 – paragraph 2 2. The assets of the insolvency estate shall include assets in the
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive Article 48 – paragraph 2 2. The assets of the insolvency estate shall include assets in the p
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a directive Article 55 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall ensure that the decision on the closure of the simplified winding-up proceedings includes a specification of the time period leading to the discharge of the entrepreneur debtor or of those founders, owners or members of an unlimited liability microenterprise or SME debtor who are personally liable for the debts of the debtor.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive Article 58 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that a creditors’ committee is established only if the general meeting of creditors so decides and in accordance with the national law in each Member State.
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the members of the creditors’ committee are appointed either at the general meeting of creditors or by decision of the court
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 3 3. Member States
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall ensure that the appointed members of the creditors’
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a directive Article 60 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall ensure that members of the creditors’ committee represent solely the interests of the whole body of creditors, including workers, and act independently of the insolvency practitioner.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a directive Article 60 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 By way of derogation from the previous subparagraph, Member States may maintain national provisions that allow to set up more than one creditors’ committee representing different groups of creditors, including workers, in the same insolvency proceedings. In this case, the members of the creditors’ committee represent solely the interests of the creditors, including workers, who appointed them.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a directive Article 60 – paragraph 2 2. The creditors’ committee owes the duties to all creditors it represents, including workers.
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the number of members composing the creditors’ committee is at least
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a directive Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the creditors’ committee’s function is to ensure that in the conduct of the insolvency proceedings the creditors’ interests including the interests of workers are protected and individual creditors are involved, in the case of the workers through a workers’ representative.
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) The wide differences in substantive insolvency laws acknowledged by Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 create barriers to the internal market by reducing the attractiveness of cross-border investments, thus impacting the cross- border movement of capital within the Union and to and from third countries, undermining the guiding principles of the Capital markets union. __________________ 32 Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) The wide differences in substantive insolvency laws acknowledged by Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 create barriers to the internal market by reducing the attractiveness of cross-border investments, thus impacting the viability of economic operations and the cross-
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 a (new) (2a) Wide differences also exist in the application of insolvency law in Member States, in particular debt management, that disincentivise business undertaking; Member States should ensure that, where an over-indebted entrepreneur has professional debts incurred in the course of his or her trade, business, craft or profession, professional debts are to be treated, for the purposes of obtaining a discharge, separately from personal debts;
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) Insolvency proceedings ensure the orderly winding down or restructuring of companies or entrepreneurs in financial and economic distress. These proceedings are key in financial investments, as they determine the final recovery value of such
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) Insolvency proceedings ensure the orderly winding down or restructuring of companies or entrepreneurs in financial and economic distress. These proceedings are key in financial investments, as they determine the final recovery value of such investments. Diverging rules among Member States have contributed to increasing legal uncertainty and unpredictability about insolvency proceedings’ outcome, so raising barriers especially for cross-border investments in the internal market. Large divergences in recovery value and time required to
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The integration of the internal market in the area of insolvency laws pursued by this Directive is a key tool for a more efficient functioning of the capital markets in the European Union, including greater access to corporate financing, diversification of portfolios and investment opportunities, which has a particularly negative impact on SMEs. Therefore, it is necessary to set out minimum requirements in targeted areas of national insolvency proceedings, which have a significant impact on the efficiency and length of such proceedings, especially on cross-border insolvency proceedings.
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The integration of the internal market in the area of insolvency laws pursued by this Directive is a key tool for a more efficient functioning of the capital markets in the European Union, including greater access to corporate financing, while also preventing the build-up of non- performing loans (NPL). Therefore, it is necessary to set out minimum requirements in targeted areas of national insolvency proceedings, which have a significant impact on the efficiency and length of such proceedings, especially on cross-border insolvency proceedings.
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The integration of the internal market in the area of insolvency laws pursued by this Directive is a key tool for a more efficient functioning of the capital markets in the European Union, including greater access to corporate financing. Therefore, it is necessary to set out minimum requirements in targeted areas of national insolvency proceedings, which have a significant impact on the efficiency and length of such proceedings, as well as creating heightened risks and costs for investors, especially on cross-border insolvency proceedings.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5a) Exceptionally, when the perfection of a legal act requires registration in a public register, e.g. the land register, the legal act may be deemed to be perfected before the registration takes place. Since the registration procedure can take up considerable time and is beyond the control of the parties, it is not appropriate or justified to refer to the point in time when the legal act is registered for the purpose of avoidance actions. For example, the transfer of ownership of a property can require that the transfer is entered in the land register. In this case, it is not appropriate to refer to the completion of the transfer of ownership, i.e. when the transfer of ownership is entered in the land register. Instead, the relevant point in time could be, for instance, the moment when the debtor’s counterparty applies for registration of the transfer of ownership in the land register.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) In the context of avoidance actions, a distinction should be made between legal acts where the claim of the counterparty was due and enforceable and has been satisfied in the owed manner (congruent coverages) and those where performance was not entirely in accordance with the creditor’s claim (incongruent coverage). Incongruent coverages include, in particular, premature payments, the satisfaction with unusual means of payments, the subsequent collateralisation of a so far unsecured claim which was not already agreed upon in the original debt agreement, granting an extraordinary termination right or other amendments not provided for in the underlying contract, the waiver of legal defences or objections or the acknowledgement of disputable debts. In the case of congruent coverages, the avoidance ground of preferences can only be invoked if the creditor of the legal act that can be declared void knew
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25) In order to guarantee that the business is sold at the best market value during the pre-pack proceedings, Member States should either ensure high standards
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 (35) National insolvency rules are not always fit to treat insolvent microenterprises and SMEs properly and in a proportionate manner. Taking into account the unique characteristics of
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 (38) In order to establish cost-effective and expeditious simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises and for SMEs, short deadlines should be introduced. Similarly, formalities for all procedural steps, including for the opening of the proceedings, the lodgement and the admission of claims, the establishment of the insolvency estate and the realisation of the assets should be minimised. A standard form should be used for submitting a request to open simplified winding-up proceedings and electronic means should be used for all communications between the competent authority, and where relevant, the insolvency practitioner, and the parties to the proceedings.
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 39 (39) All microenterprises should be able to commence proceedings to address their financial difficulties and obtain a discharge. Access to simplified winding-up proceedings should not depend on the microenterprise’s ability to cover the administrative costs of such proceedings. The laws of the Member States should introduce rules for covering the costs of administering simplified winding-up proceedings where assets and sources of revenue of the debtor are insufficient to cover those costs. Member States should also provide second chance entrepreneurs with business support, access to up-to- date information on the availability of administrative, legal, business or financial support and any means available to them to facilitate the relaunching of entrepreneurship capacity.
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 39 (39) All microenterprises and SMEs should be able to commence proceedings to address their financial difficulties and obtain a discharge. Access to simplified winding-up proceedings should not depend on the
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) In simplified winding-up proceedings, the appointment of an insolvency practitioner is usually unnecessary given the simple business operations carried out by the microenterprises that make their
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 41 (41) A microenterprise or SME debtor should be able to benefit from a temporary stay of individual enforcement actions, in order to be able to preserve the value of the insolvency estate and ensure a fair and orderly conduct of the proceedings. Member States, however, may allow competent authorities to exclude certain claims from the scope of the stay, in well- defined circumstances.
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 42 (42) Disputed claims should be dealt with in a way that does not unnecessarily complicate the conduct of simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises and for SMEs. If disputed claims cannot be quickly dealt with, the ability to dispute a claim may be used to create unnecessary delays. In deciding on the treatment of a disputed claim, the competent authority should be empowered to allow the continuation of the simplified winding-up proceedings with respect to undisputed claims only.
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 44 (44) Member States should ensure that the assets of the insolvency estate in simplified winding-up proceedings can be realised through public on-line judicial auction, if the competent authority considers this means of realisation of assets as appropriate. For this reason, Member States should ensure that one or more electronic auction systems are maintained in their territory for that purposes. This obligation should be without prejudice to the multiple platforms that exist in some Member States for on-line judicial auctions of specific types of assets. This Directive should not affect national rules on the validity of contracts for the sale and transfer of shares in companies or special legal form requirements. Member States should, for example, be able to require a notarial deed or a confirmation of signatures.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises and small and medium-sized undertakings;
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q (q) ‘party closely related to the debtor’ means the following persons, including legal persons,
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new) (qa) ‘Small and medium-sized enterprises’ or ‘SMEs’ means an entity within the meaning of Annex I to Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014;
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – introductory part Where the debtor is a natural person
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 3 – introductory part Where the debtor is a legal entity
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new) Member States may adopt or maintain rules according to which exceptionally a legal act which in order to be perfected must be registered in a public register is deemed to be perfected before the registration takes place.
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new) This Directive is without prejudice to workers’ rights to be informed and consulted in accordance with Union and national law on insolvency plans or elements of insolvency plans which may impact on terms and conditions of employment, structure of the undertaking, probable development and production and sales, substantial changes concerning organisation, introduction of new working methods or production processes, transfers of production, mergers, cut- backs or closures of undertakings or important parts thereof, and collective redundancies.
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Member States shall ensure that legal acts benefitting a creditor or a group of creditors by satisfaction, collateralisation or in any other way can be declared void if they were perfected, should the court deem it just and equitable to do so, or alternatively the court can require a sum paid in respect thereof, to the insolvency practitioner on such terms or conditions as the court thinks fit :
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) that creditor knew
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) that creditor knew
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that legal acts of the debtor against no or a manifestly inadequate consideration
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Member States shall ensure that legal acts by which the debtor has intentionally caused a detriment to the general body of creditors can be declared void by court order where it is deemed just and equitable to do so where both of the following conditions are met:
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) the other party to the legal act knew
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) the other party to the legal act knew
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the party which benefitted from the legal act that has been declared void
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new) In deciding whether it is just and equitable to make an order under this section, the court shall have regard to the rights of persons who have bona fide and for value acquired an interest in the property the subject of the application.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a (a) the successor acquired the asset against no or a manifestly inadequate consideration, unless the acquisition was in good faith;
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) the successor knew
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. This Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining provisions relating to pre- pack proceedings where such provisions provide a greater protection of workers or their representatives than those set out in this Title.
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 2 Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall provide that, upon
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall provide that, upon request of the debtor, or of workers’ representatives, the court appoints a monitor.
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new) (aa) carries its tasks in consultation with workers’ representations;
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new) (aa) may have recourse to an independent valuation where appropriate in order to satisfy requirements related to achieving market value;
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new) (ba) consults with creditors on a regular basis as may be considered reasonable;
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d (d) states whether it considers that the best bid does not constitute a manifest breach of the best-interest-of-creditors test, taking in account the impact on employment.
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Actions by the monitor listed in the first subparagraph shall be done in writing, be made available in digital format and in a timely manner to all parties involved in the preparation phase, including workers´ representatives.
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive Article 23 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that during the preparation phase, where the debtor is
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive Article 23 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that during the preparation phase, where the debtor is in a situation of likelihood of insolvency or is insolvent in accordance with national law, the debtor can benefit from a stay of individual enforcement actions in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of Directive (EU) 2019/1023, where
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a directive Article 23 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that during the preparation phase, where the debtor is in a situation of likelihood of insolvency or is insolvent in accordance with national law, the debtor can benefit from a stay of individual enforcement actions in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of Directive (EU) 2019/1023, where it
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive Article 24 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the sale process carried out during the preparation phase presents convincing guarantees for the safeguarding of employment, is competitive, transparent, fair and meets market standards.
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive Article 24 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the sale process carried out during the preparation phase is competitive, transparent, fair
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a directive Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Member States shall ensure that workers’ representatives are informed and consulted on the proposed guarantees for the safeguarding of employment. Their opinion shall be appended to the documents transmitted to the competent insolvency authority.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive Article 24 – paragraph 2 2. Where the sale process only produces one binding offer, that offer shall be
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a directive Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Member States shall include the obtaining of the services of an independent valuation practitioner as a means of gauging a fair market price;
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a directive Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new) This does not apply to credit and financial service contracts.
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new) Subparagraph 1 shall not apply to executory contracts regarding lease and tenancy agreements entered into by the debtor as a landlord or tenant concerning other property transferred to a third party who financed its acquisition or production as security.
source: 752.835
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/type |
Old
Responsible CommitteeNew
Former Responsible Committee |
committees/2/rapporteur/0/group |
Old
Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European ParliamentNew
Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats |
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4/rapporteur |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/1 |
|
docs/1 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/4 |
|
docs/4 |
Old
New
|
docs/5 |
Old
New
|
docs/6 |
Old
New
|
docs/7 |
Old
New
|
docs/8 |
Old
New
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/10 |
|
events/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
events/2 |
|
procedure/Legislative priorities/0/url |
Old
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/thematicnote.do?id=41360&l=enNew
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-priorities/thematic-note?id=41360 |
procedure/Legislative priorities/1/url |
Old
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/thematicnote.do?id=41380&l=enNew
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-priorities/thematic-note?id=41380 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
New
JURI/10/00210 |
procedure/legal_basis |
Old
New
Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 114 |
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=10030202 |
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
committees/3/opinion |
False
|
committees/3/opinion |
False
|
committees/3/opinion |
False
|
committees/3/opinion |
False
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/10/00210
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
JURI/9/10896
|
committees/0/shadows/1/name |
Old
TOOM YanaNew
TOOM Jana |
docs/5 |
|
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2023:089:TOC |
docs/5/date |
Old
2023-09-14T00:00:00New
2023-09-15T00:00:00 |
docs/6/date |
Old
2023-03-13T00:00:00New
2023-03-14T00:00:00 |
docs/7/date |
Old
2023-03-20T00:00:00New
2023-03-21T00:00:00 |
docs/8/date |
Old
2023-04-10T00:00:00New
2023-04-11T00:00:00 |
docs/9/date |
Old
2023-04-17T00:00:00New
2023-04-18T00:00:00 |
docs/5 |
|
commission |
|
docs/5/date |
Old
2023-03-14T00:00:00New
2023-03-13T00:00:00 |
docs/6/date |
Old
2023-03-21T00:00:00New
2023-03-20T00:00:00 |
docs/7/date |
Old
2023-04-11T00:00:00New
2023-04-10T00:00:00 |
docs/8/date |
Old
2023-04-18T00:00:00New
2023-04-17T00:00:00 |
docs/5/date |
Old
2023-03-13T00:00:00New
2023-03-14T00:00:00 |
docs/6/date |
Old
2023-03-20T00:00:00New
2023-03-21T00:00:00 |
docs/7/date |
Old
2023-04-10T00:00:00New
2023-04-11T00:00:00 |
docs/8/date |
Old
2023-04-17T00:00:00New
2023-04-18T00:00:00 |
docs/8 |
|
docs/4 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/4/date |
Old
2023-03-14T00:00:00New
2023-03-13T00:00:00 |
docs/5/date |
Old
2023-03-21T00:00:00New
2023-03-20T00:00:00 |
docs/4/date |
Old
2023-03-13T00:00:00New
2023-03-14T00:00:00 |
docs/5/date |
Old
2023-03-20T00:00:00New
2023-03-21T00:00:00 |
docs/4 |
|
docs/5 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
docs/3 |
|
procedure/Legislative priorities/0/title |
Old
Joint Declaration on EU legislative priorities for 2023 and 2024New
Joint Declaration 2023-24 |
procedure/Legislative priorities |
|
committees/1/opinion |
False
|
events/1 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
docs/0/docs/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0/summary |
|
docs/0/summary |
|
docs/0/docs/1 |
|
events/0/docs/1 |
|