Reinier advises national and international companies
reinier.russell@russell.nl +31 20 301 55 55Esmée advises on corporate law, contracts and corporate litigation.
esmee.bootsman@russell.nl +31 20 301 55 55Expedited liquidation is a quick way to terminate a legal entity. However, the scheme was also abused, disadvantaging creditors. A new law should prevent this. What requirements does an expedited liquidation have to meet from now on? And what options do creditors have to collect their claims?
A legal entity can be terminated by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders or the general membership meeting. As a result, the legal entity has to be liquidated. This is the case if in the legal entity assets are still available. The legal entity will then add “in liquidation” to its name. If the legal entity has no more assets, the legal entity may also choose to cease to exist immediately, i.e. expedited liquidation. This mainly occurs in the case of a private limited company.
Directors can therefore “drain” a company in expedited liquidation and then terminate it immediately. As the company disappears immediately, this makes fraud and harming creditors easy. Therefore, since November 2023, an expedited liquidation is subject to a number of requirements, which are meant to prevent abuse.
To carry out an expedited liquidation, the general meeting of shareholders must first pass a resolution for termination. When this resolution has been passed, the directors can proceed to wind up the company. To do so, they must file a number of documents with the Chamber of Commerce within 14 days of passing the resolution:
When these documents have been filed with the Chamber of Commerce, the board must notify the creditors of the expedited liquidation. In doing so, the board has to inform the creditors in writing (by e-mail or post) that the documents have been filed with the Chamber of Commerce and are available for inspection.
Creditors have an interest in being informed of a legal entity’s decision to cease to exist with immediate effect. After all, they may well still have a collectible claim against the company. Therefore, creditors must be informed about the expedited liquidation. The information obligation attempts to prevent them from being left empty-handed.
If the information is not shared by the board with the creditors, they can start proceedings before the subdistrict court to access the records. The subdistrict court can authorize the creditors to inspect the records of the already terminated company.
If creditors do not agree with the expedited liquidation, they have several options to still get their claims paid. Creditors can request a reopening of the liquidation or file for bankruptcy. They can also hold the directors personally liable for the damages suffered.
The law allows aggrieved creditors to reopen the liquidation of the company. Before reopening, a court will first assess whether a creditor has a sufficient interest in reopening and whether the company still has assets. As a creditor requests the reopening, it is the creditor who must prove that the company still has assets. They can do this by showing that a director can potentially be held liable or that a company still has claims or other assets elsewhere. In practice, however, proving this is difficult.
If a court grants the request to reopen the liquidation, a new liquidator will be appointed. The liquidator will then try to satisfy the creditors with the remaining assets.
Another option is to file for bankruptcy of the already terminated company. For this, as with the reopening of the liquidation, a creditor must prove that the company still has assets. Furthermore, the other requirements of a bankruptcy petition must also be met: there must be a situation where the (terminated) company has stopped paying and the petition must be filed by several creditors. If these conditions are met, the court can declare a bankruptcy of the company. The advantage of bankruptcy is that a trustee is appointed, who will investigate the estate and have more options to collect a debt.
Finally, it is possible to hold the directors of the liquidated company liable in private. There is a high threshold for directors’ liability, as the directors must be personally blamed.
Directors may be liable on two grounds. Firstly, if directors have acted on behalf of the company and the debt to the creditor remains unpaid and proves unrecoverable. Directors are personally liable if they already knew or should have known at the time of entering into agreements that the company would not perform and that the company would offer no opportunity for recovery.
The second ground is that directors acted or allowed the company to default on its obligations when they knew or should have known that the company’s actions would lead to non-performance and that creditors would be left empty-handed. An example is if directors selectively pay only certain creditors they know or allow a co-director to drain the company.
If one of these grounds is established, a director has acted unlawfully towards the creditor. It is therefore important to show that the director knew or should have known that the creditors were not going to be paid.
Are you dealing with a legal entity that has ceased to exist through expedited liquidation and your claim has not been paid? Are you dealing with a bankrupt debtor? We will be happy to give you advice. You can also contact us for other questions concerning corporate litigation. Please contact:
Wednesday 25 September 2024, Reinier Russell will discuss cybersecurity and data protection in litigation at the European meeting of the World Litigation Forum in Barcelona.
Before the Enterprise Chamber can grant a request for an inquiry, there must be well-founded reasons to doubt the correct policy or course of events within a company. When is this the case?
In an article in the April 2024 issue of Lady Justice, the magazine of the Women Lawyers Section of Primerus, Lisanne Meijerhof shares her passion and expertise in charity law. Why has she chosen to focus on the law of foundations and other philanthropic organizations? What legal issues should charities be aware of?
When tensions run high within a company, potentially putting the company at risk, this may be a reason to go to the Enterprise Chamber to start inquiry proceedings. Who can exercise the right to file an inquiry request?
On the departure of a statutory director/shareholder, any participation in the company must also be settled. Then a discussion may arise about the value of this participation, depending on whether the director counts as a good leaver or bad leaver. What should companies and directors pay attention to when interpreting a leaver arrangement?
Within a company, disputes regularly arise between shareholders and/or directors. This can create situations that endanger the company. To resolve such problems, inquiry proceedings were created in the Netherlands. What do these proceedings entail?