The First International Insolvency Forum was held in St. Petersburg from 17 to 19 May 2017 in the context of the VII St. Petersburg International Legal Forum.
The First International Insolvency Forum provided a unique platform for world renowned experts who deal with insolvency issues as judges, private practitioners, creditors counsel, government regulators and tax authorities, academics and other business professionals.
The topics to be discussed included a wide range of insolvency law issues and particular emphasis was placed on the opportunities and challenges created through bankruptcy law by the current financial crisis.
Organizer of business breakfast — The limited liability company “Center for Bankruptcy Problem”
Participation is by invitation only
Director, LLC Bankruptcy Problem Center; Chairman of the Expert Board dealing with Troubled Assets, Association of the Russian Banks; Managing Partner, BSR PARTNERS
The participants of this Business Breakfast will discuss the effectiveness of insolvency proceedings from the lawmaking and law enforcement practice perspectives, including the administration of pro-debtor and pro-creditor policies in legal regulation.
In reference to insolvency proceedings, most analysts tend to use such adjectives as “ineffective,” “liquidation-minded,” and so on. Then they propose one or a couple of new instruments purported to improve the effectiveness. What are the chances of such isolated legislative improvements yielding any real upgrade of the effectiveness of insolvency proceedings?
But how does one evaluate the effectiveness of insolvency proceedings, anyway? What must such evaluation include? What criteria may be applicable? Should there be a set of universal criteria equally applied to all debtor categories? Or does the concept of effectiveness take on different meanings with different categories of debtors?
Director for Development of Projects, Interfax Information Group
Director of Bankruptcy LL.M Program, Chair for Business Law, Lomonosov Moscow State University Law School, Member of the Russian Supreme Court Scientific Advisory Board
Associate Professor for the Individual and Corporate Law, Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL); Judge (retired), The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation
Ret. Chief Bankruptcy Judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court/District of Colorado
Deputy General director,State Deposit Insurance Agency of the Russian Federation
PhD in Economy, Chairman of the Board, Russian Union of Self-Regulated Organizations of Arbitration Managers
Board Member — First Vice-President at Gazprombank
The insolvency legislation is a living, rapidly evolving system of laws. Changes in insolvency law reflect global economic trends. Insolvency law is to a great extent about the guarantees available to lenders and borrowers. It is the civilized way to resolve serious controversies that may arise between lenders and borrowers. Therefore, a change in insolvency law can be a powerful factor underpinning the stability of civil commerce. The degree of balance in the national insolvency legislation defines the investment climate in the economy.
Shaped by domestic economic processes, the evolution of insolvency law is at the same time subject to the international standards being developed to regulate insolvency. The work of the UNCITRAL Working Groups on insolvency serves as a model of how these standards are developed.
It would be interesting to illuminate which promising insolvency law improvement guidelines are currently on the table, which nations are reforming their insolvency law, and what kinds of changes are viewed as more progressive.
Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Judge, Supreme Court of Israel
Director-General, Legal Execution Department, Ministry of Justice of Thailand
Associate Professor for the Individual and Corporate Law, Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL); Judge (retired), The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation
Developer insolvency no longer spells doom for the investors, like it used to. Although the number of fraudulent housing developers out there is on the rise, and so necessarily is the number of cheated investors, there exist notable positive trends in the advocacy of investors’ rights.
On the one hand, the housing development business becomes more transparent. The background of market players can be checked before the prospective investor makes a choice of developer. On the other hand, the pertinent legal and regulatory framework continues to gradually improve, offering better legal security to private investors. One piece of legislation that has instrumentally contributed to better investor security is the 210-FZ of 12 July 2011, which amends the Federal Insolvency (Bankruptcy) Act with certain fine points about developer insolvency.
What financial risks do investors face in the event of developer insolvency? If the law is meticulously followed, and absent premeditated fraud on the part of the developer, the probability of seeing either your investment money back, or a deed to the home of your choice is fairly high.
Deputy Director of the Department for Finance and Banking Activity and Investment Development, Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation
Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Head of the Direction, The Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending
Ret. Chief Bankruptcy Judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court/District of Colorado
Consultant, Research Center of Private Law named after Sergey Alekseev under the President of the Russian Federation
Deputy Head, Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation
The institution of subsidiary liability, as an indemnification vehicle that is supposed to work in favour of the creditors in an insolvency process, has not been applied with sufficient effectiveness. Indeed, statistics indicate that creditors seen no debt repayment in 70% of completed insolvency proceedings. In essence, the enforcement of subsidiary liability is reduced to obtaining a favourable, albeit often unenforceable when it comes to the actual indemnification, court determination to hold the debtor’s formal chief officer liable, followed by the unredeemed debt being written off the books.
Why is this institution not applied effectively? How do you identify the real party liable, the beneficiary of the business earnings and/or the beneficiary of a divestiture of assets or undertaking, and thus take the insolvency proceedings to a place where the debt can actually be recovered? How do you prove malfeasance by the proprietors and/or executives of a business entity?
How does subsidiary liability work in foreign jurisdictions? This session will focus on the latest changes in the enforcement of subsidiary liability and the role of international collaboration in the identification and exposure of the true beneficiaries with a view to holding them liable.
Head of bankruptcy Directorate, Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation
Associate Professor for the Individual and Corporate Law, Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL); Judge (retired), The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation
Consultant, Research Center of Private Law named after Sergey Alekseev under the President of the Russian Federation
Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Partner, Fischer Ramp Partner AG
Barrister, Outer Temple Chambers
Judge, Supreme Court of Russia
Director of Expert and Analytics department, Deposit Insurance Agency
Advocate, Senior Managing Partner, Attorneys at Law Pen & Paper
The world economic crisis and the sanctions with regard to the RF have resulted in a sustained crisis in Russian economy. This has entailed sharp increase of insolvent companies.
According to statistics, a great number of insolvent companies, unfortunately, get into the bankruptcy procedure and are then liquidated. The procedures of asset restructuring aimed at restoring the solvency are quite seldom applied due to the low corporate culture and lack of liquidity of the bank system. As a consequence, there are a lot of “offended” creditors, which, in its turn, results in growth of conflicts evolving into the plane of criminal legal relations.
Today at the time of intensive development of civil and administrative legislation on bankruptcy the criminal legislation of the RF undergoes no substantial changes, which results in practical impossibility to apply special norms of the Criminal Code of the RF regulating relations in bankruptcy of entities. As a result, investigative agencies apply the general norms of the Criminal Code of the RF within the frames of economic crimes, which results in unfounded prosecution of representatives of business and protraction of bankruptcy procedures. As a result, the assets of insolvent companies “get hanged up” and are not involved in the economic turnover of the RF for a long time, which causes considerable damage to Russian economy.
The task of a national legislator is to strive to improve the criminal legislation of the RF, to bring it closer to the real economic situation in the society, which is certain to have a positive impact on the corporate culture of business in the RF.
The major issues to be covered:
Chairman of the Board, Ulmart
Lawyer, Partner, Head of Criminal Law Practice, attorneys at law Pen & Paper
Swiss attorney
Senior Partner, Anti-crisis Consulting Group, FUKAU
Head of Legal Department, The Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation
Deputy head of the Economic Division, State Duma
The declaration of personal insolvency is a widespread method to settle personal debts, practiced world-over. Personal insolvency is handled differently from country to country, but the point is always the same: to rid the individual of their debt burden and re-launch their financial affairs with a clean slate. This settlement vehicle benefits the debtor and the creditor alike. Personal bankruptcy is organized so as to heed the interests of all creditors while granting no seniority to any particular debts or lenders.
The vehicle of personal insolvency furthermore protects the debtor from illegal acts on the part of the lender’s agents, the so-called collectors, who may be inclined to bullying and may occasionally act outside the law. In many countries, the business of debt collection is subject to a dedicated corpus of regulations.
What are the bedrock regulatory principles on personal insolvency and debt collection, country to country? How has the new Russian debt collection law been doing on the ground? How has the practice of personal insolvency fared so far?
Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Consultant, Research Center of Private Law named after Sergey Alekseev under the President of the Russian Federation
The Deputy Minister, Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation
Counsel, VTB 24
Director-General, Legal Execution Department, Ministry of Justice of Thailand
Director for Development of Projects, Interfax Information Group
Ret. Chief Bankruptcy Judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court/District of Colorado
Associate Professor, International Law Department, Russian State University of Justice
The modern world is characterized by the broad geography of economic operations and the dominance of transnational and cross-regional business entities. The build-up of international economic and commercial ties comes to a point where it is no longer possible to play by the national rule-book alone. This concerns most of all aspects of economic activity, and insolvency is no exception.
Cross-border insolvency is a topic that continues to gain relevance. This is confirmed, for instance, by the fact that an authority such as UNCITRAL has made cross-border insolvency a top priority topic in its work. Senior level UNCITRAL administrators have been invited to attend the forum, and their presence promises to make the cross-border insolvency debate more lively, productive and illuminating.
The plan is for the session to elicit where the international community currently is in its advancement of the framework principles of cross-border insolvency, review the international enforcement practice of cross-border insolvency clauses, identify the most controversial points in the settlement of cross-border insolvency issues, and assess the positive effects in those countries which do enforce the universally recognized cross-border insolvency principles.
General Director, International and Comparative Law Research Center
Opening speech
Professor, Humboldt-University at Berlin
Judge (Retired), Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals, Rosario, Province of Santa Fe, Argentina
The Secretary, United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
Partner, Head of Legal Services, KPMG Russia & CIS, JSC KPMG
Associate Professor, International Law Department, Russian State University of Justice
The modern world is characterized by the broad geography of economic operations and the dominance of transnational and cross-regional business entities. The build-up of international economic and commercial ties comes to a point where it is no longer possible to play by the national rule-book alone. This concerns most of all aspects of economic activity, and insolvency is no exception.
Cross-border insolvency is a topic that continues to gain relevance. This is confirmed, for instance, by the fact that an authority such as UNCITRAL has made cross-border insolvency a top priority topic in its work. Senior level UNCITRAL administrators have been invited to attend the forum, and their presence promises to make the cross-border insolvency debate more lively, productive and illuminating.
The plan is for the session to elicit where the international community currently is in its advancement of the framework principles of cross-border insolvency, review the international enforcement practice of cross-border insolvency clauses, identify the most controversial points in the settlement of cross-border insolvency issues, and assess the positive effects in those countries which do enforce the universally recognized cross-border insolvency principles
Partner, Law Practice Group “Ivanyan & Partners”
Founding Partner, Astigarraga Davis
Director of Expert and Analytics department, Deposit Insurance Agency
Judge (Retired), Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals, Rosario, Province of Santa Fe, Argentina
Ret. Chief Bankruptcy Judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court/District of Colorado
Professor, Humboldt-University at Berlin
Organizer of the discussion session – State Corporation «Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs (Vnesheconombank)
Russia’s major development bank, Vnesheconombank, is celebrating its tenth anniversary. Over the decade, the Bank has financed some 200 investment projects worth a total of more than 4 trillion roubles.
VEB projects include the construction of the Boguchany Hydro Power Plant, the largest in modern Russia, the global market leader Tobolsk polypropylene production complex, Olympic facilities, Sukhoi Superjet 100 aircraft, as well as export finance.
The Bank’s new strategy in the next five years gives priority to investments in high technology industries, National Technological Initiative (NTI) projects, infrastructure development, non-resource exports, and conversion of the defence industry for civilian products.
http://www.veb.ru/en/index.phpAssociate Professor for the Individual and Corporate Law, Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL); Judge (retired), The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation
The meaning of success in an insolvency case is debatable. Corporate reorganization and renewed solvency may be deemed a success in most cases, but debt redemption and corporate winding-up also may sometimes be viewed as a success. What are the criteria by which to determine the success of an insolvency case? What are some illuminating success stories from the court practice on insolvency? What is the secret to winning an insolvency case? This session will discuss these questions and more.
The Deputy Minister, Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation
The Director of the Department for reorganization and bankruptcy, Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Belarus
Livestream from Minsk
Head Legal Directorate, State Corporation “Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs (Vnesheconombank)”
Senior Vice-president for Distressed Asset Management, State corporation “Bank for development and foreign economic affairs (Vnesheconombank)”
Deputy General director,State Deposit Insurance Agency of the Russian Federation
Professor, Humboldt-University at Berlin
Director of Litigation Department of Legal Directorate, State corporation “Bank for development and foreign economic affairs (Vnesheconombank)”
Managing Director - Director of Enforcement and bankruptcy Department, Sberbank
Director for Development of Projects, Interfax Information Group
The importance of information disclosure is very high and growing in today’s world. The protection of lenders’ rights is the primary concern in this. Indeed, it is absolutely essential for lenders to have standby access to fully updated pertinent information, any change in which may entail legal implications for the lender. One of the key aspects of information access is the maintenance of security interest registries, which are logs wherein the data is recorded pertaining to pledges and their functional equivalents, as well as the details of leases, retention of property title, and other information carrying legal implications for third parties.
Registries of security interests are generated and used in many economies. UNCITRAL has developed a set of standards for the keeping of these registries, derived from best international practice in the field. The application of these standards would substantially enhance the protection of the rights of lenders and other parties to civil commerce.
It is difficult to overestimate the criticality of disclosure of these particular kinds of information, especially when insolvency proceedings are ongoing against a debtor. What specific types of information should be subject to disclosure, and how the registries should be organized for such information, are two of the questions to be answered by this session.
Senior Legal Officer, United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
President, Federal Notary Chamber
Deputy head of the Economic Division, State Duma
Associate Professor for the Individual and Corporate Law, Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL); Judge (retired), The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation
Judge (Retired), Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals, Rosario, Province of Santa Fe, Argentina
Executive Director, Non-Profit Partnership “For Advancement of Corporate Law”
Professor, Humboldt-University at Berlin
Prior to the global financial crisis of 2008-2009, the widespread take on the insolvency of financial players (banks, insurers, financial market infrastructure providers, etc.) was to let their bankruptcy proceed to winding-up, if the organization showed signs of insolvency (bankruptcy). The proper procedures had to come into play as early as feasible, so as to assure the maximum satisfaction of creditors’ claims, and secure the insolvency proceedings as such. The need was generally recognized to put the safeguards in place to protect the investors (both individuals and, in many economies, also legal entities) and, in some cases, also to protect other retail consumers of financial services, e.g., retail investors, insurance sponsors, etc.
The global financial crisis of 2008-2009 ushered in a new perspective on the issue of the insolvency of financial players (most notably, the major financial institutions critical to system continuity), and compelled the parties concerned to look for new ways to settle the insolvency of such entities. Some of the settlement instruments offered by the international community have found their way into Russian legislation and the practices of the Bank of Russia and the Investment Insurance Agency. However, what is urgently needed is a more comprehensive take on the insolvency settlement of all financial players, wherein special guidelines shall be provided in respect of banks, insurance companies, non-government pension funds, and system-critical financial institutions. This task is a priority that must be addressed in the nearest term.
The plan is to discuss the following at the roundtable:
Deputy Governor, Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)
Deputy Governor, Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)
Director of the Legal Department, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)
Director of Bankruptcy LL.M Program, Chair for Business Law, Lomonosov Moscow State University Law School, Member of the Russian Supreme Court Scientific Advisory Board
Director of department for liquidation of financial institutions, Deposit insurance agency
Professor, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg
Enforcement of workers’ rights is the most acute issue in a bankruptcy. Workers are a driving force of a company. They are interested in preserving the business like no one else. Yet they are most vulnerable to financial difficulties of the company, more than other creditors, because often a worker’s salary is the only source of income for his or her family.
The problem of non-payment of salaries by a bankrupt company differs from country to country. Somewhere it is a very common and complicated problem because it directly depends on economic situation in the country and activity of the workers themselves due to traditional relations between workers and employers. In other countries the problems of salary non-payment are less acute in particular due to the efforts of various workers’ associations defending the workers’ rights and hardline stance of public authorities immediately reacting to non-payment of salary. Yet like bankruptcy itself, salary arrears still actually happen. And this means that the topic of workers’ right protection in bankruptcy is relevant for all the states in the world.
There are some international instruments aimed at protecting the workers’ rights (for instance, conventions and recommendations of the International Labour Organization). National legislations also include special norms dedicated to ensuring the workers’ demands. Establishment of a preferential debts regime for salary arrears and special guarantee institutions are main wage security tools in bankruptcy.
The session dedicated to the protection of workers’ rights in case of employer’s bankruptcy will discuss the mechanisms used in various countries to achieve this goal. What is the progress of guarantee funds in the countries where they exist? What are the primary recent achievements in guaranteeing the workers’ right in bankruptcy?
The discussion will gravitate around the question of what is better, after all: priority of satisfaction of creditors’ claims or a guarantee institution?
Chairman, Fund of Social Insurance of the Russian Federation
Secretary of State - Deputy Minister, The Ministry of Labour and Social Protection
Chief Justice, Supreme Court and Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe
Partner, Attorneys at Law Bojovic & Partners
Deputy Director, Department of Sanation and Bankruptcy, Ministry of Economy
AHML (Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending) was established in 1997 by the Government of the Russian Federation for implementing the government policy on the housing and mortgage markets. In 2015 the Integrated Development Institution for the Housing Sector was founded on the AHML basis. The main task of the Integrated Institution is to provide a complex support of the housing sector in Russia and to make housing more affordable for Russian citizens.
The main AHML goals are further development of the mortgage and securities markets, development of rental housing and real estate mutual funds, implementation of means for enhancing the investment appeal of housing sector, providing developers with land resources, creation of a comfortable and quality living environment.
https://дом.рфFedresurs, a federal register operated by the Interfax Group, is the main e-channel for the disclosure of legally valid information about Russian economic entities and is a publicly accessible resource for the analysis of counterparties, encumbrances and charges and the monitoring of bankruptcies. Court-appointed insolvency trustees and auctioneers use the portal to disclose information about the course of insolvency proceedings, and the conduct and results of auctions for the sale of debtors' property. In the practice of arbitration courts in 2016 there were more than 16,000 references to the register, which is almost 25% more than in 2015 and twice as many as in 2014.
https://www.fedresurs.ru/Ulmart is the largest private Russian internet company specializing in the e-commerce market. Deloitte named the company among the top 50 world's largest online retailers and Forbes included Ulmart in the top 10 most efficient Runet enterprises. In 2017, Ulmart together with the Roscongress Foundation has hosted Russia House, the official headquarters of the Russian business at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
https://www.ulmart.ru/International and Comparative Law Research Center is an independent non-profit think tank that provides advice and conducts research on international law both public and private as well comparative law. In this capacity the Center cooperates with various stakeholders including governments and businesses and the academic community.
The Center’s core team of researchers the Center regularly works together with experts from academic and practitioners communities from Russia and other countries on particular projects and initiatives.
Center’s library provides access to key databases and books from leading international publishers.
http://iclrc.ru/?lang=en
© “CC “SPBILF” Ltd 2011-2018.
The use of Web site materials for commercial purposes is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of “CC “SPBILF” Ltd.