Commentary on Ruling Ordinance No. 15862 of 2024: Bankruptcy and Preventive Concordat

The recent Ordinance No. 15862 of June 6, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers an important opportunity for reflection on the interrelations between preventive concordat procedures and bankruptcy declarations. The decision particularly focuses on the issue of admission to the passive and on the debt discharge effects, clarifying some fundamental aspects of bankruptcy legislation.

The Regulatory Context

The central issue addressed by the Court concerns the distinction between the various effects that occur in the case of so-called omisso medio bankruptcy, that is, the one that occurs without the resolution of the concordat. The Court relies on Articles 184 and 186 of the Bankruptcy Law, which respectively govern the effects of the concordat and the methods of resolution.

Approved preventive concordat - Declaration of so-called omisso medio bankruptcy, without resolution of the concordat - Admission to the passive - Concordat falcidia - Applicability - Distinction - Basis. In terms of admission to the passive following the declaration of so-called omisso medio bankruptcy, if the bankruptcy was declared when it was still possible to resolve the approved preventive concordat pursuant to Article 186 of the Bankruptcy Law, the requesting creditor is not required to bear the debt discharge effects and definitive consequences referred to in Article 184 of the Bankruptcy Law, since the implementation of the plan is rendered impossible by the occurrence of an event such as bankruptcy which, overlapping the concordat itself, inevitably makes it unachievable; on the contrary, the partial debt discharge effect does not cease where the bankruptcy was declared when the deadline for requesting the resolution of the approved concordat had already expired.

The Implications of the Ruling

This ruling clarifies that in cases where bankruptcy is declared while it is still possible to resolve the concordat, the creditor should not suffer the debt discharge effects. This means that if the bankruptcy renders the implementation of the concordat plan impossible, it is not permissible to impose the consequences of a procedure that could not be completed on the creditor. This aspect is fundamental to ensure some protection for creditors, who cannot be penalized by events beyond their control.

  • Clarifies the rights of creditors in the case of omisso medio bankruptcy.
  • Establishes that the deadline for requesting the resolution of the concordat is crucial for the application of debt discharge effects.
  • Reiterates the importance of regulatory clarity in complex contexts such as those of bankruptcy procedures.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 15862 of 2024 represents an important milestone in Italian bankruptcy jurisprudence. It not only clarifies the rights of creditors in cases of bankruptcy intersected with a preventive concordat but also contributes to outlining a clearer framework for managing bankruptcy procedures. It is essential that all parties involved in such procedures fully understand the implications of this ruling to protect their rights and interests.

Bianucci Law Firm