Bankruptcy Law

The court may declare personal bankruptcy or a management ban  against any person mentioned in Article L. 653-1 who, by voluntarily abstaining from cooperating with the procedure, has obstructed its smooth running . The text does not require proof of the manager's intention to hinder the procedure .
The lack of willingness to cooperate must be characterized: a manager who has presented himself to  …

No cooperation with the procedure

The court may declare personal bankruptcy or a management ban  against any person mentioned in Article L. 653-1 who, by voluntarily abstaining from cooperating with the procedure, has obstructed its smooth running . The text does not require proof of the manager's intention to hinder the procedure .

The lack of willingness to cooperate must be characterized: a manager who has presented himself to the liquidator in order to provide full explanations of the company's situation, and who has sent him a copy of a memo on the company's accounting situation and its commercial redeployment, cannot be sanctioned , nor can a manager who misses the only appointment set by the liquidator, since no specific evidence is provided as to the impact of this behavior on the smooth running of the procedure . Furthermore, difficulties in cooperation between the company manager and the liquidator do not constitute a wilful abstention likely to hinder the smooth running of the procedure and justify a conviction , all the more so when the liquidator has never been in direct contact with the company manager, but only with his counsel .

On the other hand, where there is good reason to do so, the court will accept that the manager was unable to cooperate with the bodies involved in the procedure. This is the case when the managing director informs the trustee by e-mail that, due to a new job, he is unable to attend certain hearings , or when, at the time of the opening of the insolvency procedure, he has encountered personal family problems which have led to a serious state of depression, making it impossible for him to react to the financial difficulties which have made him homeless and therefore unable to receive summonses . Similarly, a manager's negligence is not sufficient to constitute bad faith in withholding information from the liquidator when it can be explained by the fact that the company had ceased trading two years previously, that it had no employees and that the manager had suffered from health problems .

On the other hand, the prohibition on managing any company which accompanies the judicial supervision to which the manager of a legal entity is subject does not have the effect of discharging him of his obligation to cooperate with the bodies of the insolvency procedure subsequently opened against the company, so that the fact of not honoring the summons to attend a meeting with the judicial liquidator and sending him a letter merely informing him that the documents requested have been seized and placed under judicial control constitutes a case of bankruptcy .

Cass. com., 11 April 2018, LawLex202100001843JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 16 September 2014, LawLex202100001933JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 17 November 2015, LawLex202100001780JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 24 March 2015, LawLex202100001936JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 24 May 2018, LawLex202100001941JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 8 March 2017, LawLex202100001938JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 17 October 2018, LawLex202100001852JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 1 July 2020, LawLex202300008694JBJ (LJ).

Bankruptcy Law

1009. No cooperation with the procedure

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

1009. No cooperation with the procedure

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise