Bibliographie sélective OHADA

Environmental reclamation obligations are statutory mechanisms designed to regulate environmental protection by corporate entities. Bankruptcy laws on the other hand are meant to offer insolvent corporations an opportunity to reorganize their affairs, satisfy creditors claims and make a fresh start. In practice, the application of bankruptcy laws can undermine key environmental reclamation objectives, leading many to ask whether a corporation undergoing restructuring with significant outstanding environmental reclamation obligations should be able to commence bankruptcy proceedings to satisfy creditors’ claims? By employing the doctrinal and comparative research methodologies, this research interrogates that inquiry. It argues that, despite the importance of bankruptcy protection for corporations undergoing financial distress, environmental protection should be paramount. Although sustainable finance (SF) instruments have been deployed by banks to enable creditors to mitigate environmental concerns in their investments, the persistent recurrence of environmental reclamation issues in the oil and gas sector particularly during insolvencies, underscores the need for financial investors to strengthen their investment policies to reflect best practices providing the desired protection for the environment. The research finds that, although SF and environmental, social and governance (ESG) approaches, are commendable, they are insufficient in instilling adequate regulatory impact on the environment compared to judicial control offered by the courts. The thesis concludes that whilst judicial control mechanism is not without concerns, with government’s deliberate financial policy and judicial control to complement SF and ESG efforts, ESG and SF mechanisms can be strengthened to compel greater significant influence on best practices in lending.

The procedure of liquidation of assets can be closed for the extinction of liabilities or for insufficient assets. The court may then, at the request of any interested person or ex officio, at any time during the proceedings and after a report by the official receiver, close the proceedings. In case of insufficiency of assets, the business disappears and, perhaps, the hope of any payment to creditors as well. For a long time, it was accepted that the closure for lack of assets allows creditors to resume individual proceedings against the debtor, especially if the latter returns to better circumstances. This traditional solution has been abandoned. According to OHADA Uniform Act on the organisation of collective procedures for the settlement of liabilities, revised on 10 December 2015, closure for insufficiency of assets no longer automatically gives creditors the right to take individual action. Thus, when a liquidation leads to a shortage of assets, the satisfaction of creditors remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to show that despite this reform, the protection of creditors’ rights has not changed significantly in the event of insufficient assets. Indeed, any possible recourse to the recovery of their claims remains paralysed by certain measures that infringe their rights. The infringements can be described as severe or moderate depending on the case.

Insolvency and business recovery laws in Nigeria have not evolved to incorporate reorganisation, reforming insolvent oil firms' operations to boost commercial oil firms' steadiness and economic suitability like other moderately developed countries. In Nigeria, liquidation is understood by many as the panacea to indebtedness. The research evaluates the Nigerian insolvency and business recovery legal regime to sustain indebted oil firms from economic shocks due to the global decline in the oil price to avert imminent business failures due to insufficient cash flows. The aim is to fill the gaps in Nigeria's insolvency and business recovery laws by recommending a model for the sustenance of oil firms and to suggest the reform of the gaps identified in the existing laws and the extant literature on the subject. The paper opted for conceptual legal review, comparative legal and policies analyses of solvency and business recovery legislations in Nigeria, Malaysia, India, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States. These nations were designated for this study because their insolvency and business recovery legal regime are business rescued driven, not winding up centred. The study is library research-based to address some of the flaws in Nigeria's insolvency and business recovery laws. The study finds that Nigerian legislation on insolvency is flawed in oil firms' salvage, improvement and rearrangement. It ends that, statutory bodies in the designated case study nations are efficient than those in Nigeria due to the strong political will of their governments in supporting insolvent oil firms for successful financial recovery, to safeguard jobs, to protect creditors and to enhance the wealth of their nations through sound business recovery policies and laws. The study, advocates, remodel of Nigeria's insolvency and business recovery legislations and policies in compliance with the international standards on insolvent oil firms salvaged and creditors focused policies for a robust economy. The study concludes with the recommendation for further study to consider quantitative analysis research methodology to project further scholarship on the subject.

This contribution considers the legislative regulation of the job security (which boils down to preservation of employment) of employees in case of financial distress of a company. It juxtaposes the legislative regulation of four interrelated processes a company may engage in where it finds itself in financial distress, namely a voluntary internal restructuring (especially retrenchment), the transfer of the business or part of the business, business rescue and winding up. The legislative endeavour to preserve the job security of employees in all these processes is described and analysed. The discussion shows that room exists for companies to circumvent this protection and, to the extent that the protection does apply, that it remains difficult for employees to ultimately challenge the substance of decisions negatively affecting their job security. The main protection for employees in all these processes is procedural in nature and to be found in their rights to be informed of and consulted prior to decisions negatively affecting them. In this regard, business rescue is the most employee-friendly process. Participation in this process by employees, however, requires a fine balance as it may be self-defeating and lead to winding up and the permanent loss of jobs.

Chapter 6 of the companies Act has attempted to resolve problems created by the ineffectiveness of judicial management which has failed to provide suitable alternative to the liquidation. The process of business rescue proceedings has made some impact on the liability of sureties in so far as it relates to creditors. Moratorium has been imposed once the business rescue proceedings commences and therefore the principal debtors are protected against any legal action unless the court or business rescue practitioner has consented thereto. The question is what is the impact of the business rescue proceedings on the rights of creditors against the sureties of the company under business rescue proceedings and what is the judicial position in so far as it relates to liabilities of sureties during business rescue proceedings, finally what is the position of comparative law in respect of other foreign Jurisprudence terms of business rescue proceedings and the liability of sureties. The South African Companies Act does not regulate the situation of creditor’s rights against sureties of a financially distressed Company. In terms of American law, the situation is different. Creditor’s rights against non-debtors (including sureties) is regulated by Bankruptcy Codes. In terms of bankruptcy codes, the discharge of a debtor does not affect the liability of the nondebtors or other entities. There are divergent views in terms of South African Court decisions in respect of liability of sureties. Some Judges believe that the commencement of business rescue proceedings does not affect the liability of sureties and others are of the view that the beginning of business rescue proceedings releases sureties from their obligations towards creditors unless business rescue plan or deed of suretyship provides otherwise. It is therefore recommended that our legislature introduces some new sections into the companies act. One Section should be similar to section 524(e) of the bankruptcy codes which expressly states that a discharge granted to the principal debtor does not affect the liability of sureties towards creditors. Another section should be similar to section 105(a), which provide courts with powers to make any order to realize the objectives of the companies act. This to avoid conflicting courts decisions on this issue.

Alarmed at the ease with which global bankruptcy jurisdiction can be engineered in the US through a combination of the Bankruptcy Code’s low bar to entry and the worldwide effects of a bankruptcy case, critics argue that the US promotes abusive bankruptcy forum shopping and harmful imposition of US norms on overseas stakeholders. This article advances a revised account of US bankruptcy jurisdiction over non-US debtors from a distinctively Anglo-American standpoint. The article’s central thesis is that critics overemphasise formal jurisdictional rules and pay insufficient attention to how US courts actually exercise jurisdiction in practice. It compares the formal law ‘on the books’ in the US and UK for determining whether or not a domestic insolvency or restructuring proceeding relating to a foreign debtor can be maintained in each jurisdiction and provides a functional account of how US bankruptcy jurisdiction over foreign entities is exercised in practice using the concept of jurisdictional congruence as a benchmark.

IRep - Nottingham Trent University's open access institutional research repository

IRep - Nottingham Trent University's open access institutional research repository

This contribution focuses on the development of bank resolution regimes as a credible antidote to the ‘too big to fail' problem. The main objective of the analysis is to demonstrate the repercussions and challenges resulting from the implementation of bank resolution schemes on a cross-border level. This work is a selective survey of specific legal questions, which remain relatively unaddressed by academic literature and international standard-setting bodies (e.g. bank resolution triggers or safeguards for bank creditors under bank resolution) or still problematic (e.g. resolution planning or cooperation and information exchange between resolution authorities), in particular when applied in a cross-border context. The author aims to shed more light to the complexities of cross-border bank resolution while trying to answer to the fundamental question: have we ended the ‘too big to fail' problem?

This thesis explores three important issues in financial distress and corporate bankruptcy: bankruptcy venue choice and creditor recovery, the efficiency of Chapter 11 corporate bankruptcy and distressed exchanges, and the bankruptcy ripple effect on peer firms’ investment policy.

This article argues that, with the global or cross-border nature of many corporate activities, there is an increasing need for a uniform insolvency law approach to the financial distress of a corporation in the Southern African Development Community. In doing so, the article highlights lessons the community may learn from the Insolvency Act of the Organisation for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa. Emphasis is given to that organization’s success in developing a uniform insolvency act (ie one which is directly applicable in its contracting states). The article also proposes a number of recommendations.