Bankruptcy Law

The proposals made for the payment of the debtor's debts may concern deadlines and remissions, which the creditors may choose to accept or not . Where the proposal made to a creditor relates to deadlines and remissions, failure to reply to the legal representative's consultation letter within thirty days of receipt must be deemed to constitute acceptance of the proposal.
However, the presumption o …

Deadlines and remissions

The proposals made for the payment of the debtor's debts may concern deadlines and remissions, which the creditors may choose to accept or not . Where the proposal made to a creditor relates to deadlines and remissions, failure to reply to the legal representative's consultation letter within thirty days of receipt must be deemed to constitute acceptance of the proposal.

However, the presumption only applies if the liquidator's letter is completely unambiguous. The Court of Cassation has ruled that creditors' failure to respond to the legal representative's consultation on deadlines and remissions does not mean that they accept the proposal, which includes a reduction in the amount of their claim, where the terms of the alternative set out in the letter are ambiguous . Conversely, creditors who have not responded within thirty days to the consultation on the proposed options for paying their claims and who, in accordance with the clear and unambiguous terms of the letter sent to them, are deemed by their silence to have accepted the least favorable option, cannot claim that their interests have been sacrificed, as they were given the opportunity to choose and were fully informed of the consequences of their inertia . A creditor who has not responded within the prescribed period to the legal representative's letter of consultation, informing him of the penalty for failing to respond, may not subsequently contest the option chosen in the plan .

In the absence of similar provisions, the rule that a creditor's silence constitutes acceptance of the legal representative's proposal does not apply where the legal representative's subsequently suggests amending the plan to reduce the amount of the claims: whether or not the creditors respond to the consultation, they cannot be required to reduce their debt .

In addition, a creditor who has been admitted to the debtor's liabilities may not be required to remit any claim that it has expressly refused: it may therefore demand to be repaid in full in accordance with the schedule in the continuation plan .

Lastly, under the terms of Article L. 626-19(2) of the Commercial Code , the reduction of the claim is not definitively acquired until the last payment due under the plan has been made at the set time .

C. com. L. 626-5, applicable to the receivership procedure by virtue of art. L. 631-19.

Cass. com., 15 December 2015, LawLex202100001800JBJ (RJ).

CA Grenoble, 9 December 2021, LawLex202200005915JBJ (S).

CA Nîmes, 15 June 2022, LawLex202200004120JBJ (S).

CA Saint-Denis de la Réunion, 13 April 2021, LawLex202200006044JBJ (S).

CA Paris, 9 March 2001, LawLex202200006380JBJ (RJ).

Applicable on reference from art. L. 631-19.

See for applications, Cass. com., 9 May 2007, LawLex202100005314JBJ (RJ) ; 3 October 2006, LawLex202100005315JBJ (RJ).

Bankruptcy Law

557. Deadlines and remissions

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

557. Deadlines and remissions

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