Bankruptcy Law

The resumption of the procedure has retroactive effect for all the debtor's assets that the liquidator should have realized prior to the closure of the judicial liquidation procedure . However, the resumption of the procedure does not entail the general divestiture of the debtor, who remains free to contract and commit assets that were never included in the liquidation: the retroactive effect of t …

Retroactive effect

The resumption of the procedure has retroactive effect for all the debtor's assets that the liquidator should have realized prior to the closure of the judicial liquidation procedure . However, the resumption of the procedure does not entail the general divestiture of the debtor, who remains free to contract and commit assets that were never included in the liquidation: the retroactive effect of the resumption is limited to the seizure and realization of assets and the exercise of actions omitted in the closed procedure . However, the liquidator, who had been divested by the court ruling closing the insolvency procedure, must be considered as still vested with his prerogatives on the date of issue of the writ of attachment .

The resumption may concern assets not covered by the decision to reopen the proceedings, provided that the latter has retroactive effect for all assets which, at the date of closure of the court-supervised liquidation procedure, form part of the debtor's assets subject to the receivership procedure and have not been realized . If the debtor's assets consist of a sum of money, the simplified receivership procedure is applicable by law .

A court ruling to reopen an insolvency procedure does not have the effect of making claims brought by a creditor under a contract concluded after the opening of the initial procedure subject to the prohibition of individual proceedings , nor does it prevent a guarantor sued in enforcement of his undertaking, whose harm is distinct from that suffered collectively by the creditors, from taking individual action against the liquidator after the court-supervised liquidation for lack of assets has been closed . Lastly, since the resumption does not entail the opening of a new court-supervised liquidation procedure, it does not prevent the liquidator from sending the creditor holding a published security a warning to declare his claim, where this was not sent before the closure .

Cass. com., 22 March 2017, LawLex202100001607JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 13 June 2006, LawLex202300004338JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 10 May 2012, LawLex202300006943JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 24 March 2015, LawLex202300004335JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 23 June 2015, LawLex202300006771JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 22 March 2016, LawLex202100001608JBJ (LJ).

Bankruptcy Law

954. Retroactive effect

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

954. Retroactive effect

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