Ar Lietuvoje nustatytas restruktūrizavimo plano tvirtinimo reguliavimas, užtikrina paveiktų ir nepaveikiamų kreditorių interesų balansą?
Koklevičius, Domantas |
Prieš kelis metus buvo iš esmes pakeistas restruktūrizavimo institutas Lietuvoje. Dėl to iškilo galimybė susiformuoti neteisingai ar neefektyviai sureguliuotoms proceso dalims, įvertinus ir tai, kad teismų praktikos nėra daug dėl neilgai galiojančios tvarkos bei to, kad restruktūrizavimas nėra dažnas pasirinkimas su nemokumo problemomis susiduriantiems juridiniams asmenims. Vieni svarbiausių pakeitimų atsirado balsavimo dėl pritarimo restruktūrizavimo plano tarp kreditorių. Kreditoriai yra išskiriami į dvi grupes – paveikimus ir nepaveikiamus, balsavimas vyksta grupėse balsuoti gali tik paveikiami kreditoriai. Dėl to kyla klausimas ar nepaveikiami kreditoriai nėra nepalankioje situacijoje ir ar jų interesai yra teisingai užtikrinti. Paveikiami kreditoriai procese yra privilegijuoti ir tiesiogiai išreiškia savo valią. Nepaveikiami negali to padaryti balsuodami, tačiau jie tai gali pasiekti teisminiame procese, nes teismo pareiga yra patvirtini planą kuris geriausiai suderina visų dalyvių interesus iš to kyla pareiga ir apsaugoti nepaveikiamus kreditorius. Kitas būdas kyla iš JAV esančios praktikos, tai yra dirbtinis ir nežymus paveikimas tai galima laikyti „pilkosios zonos“ priemonėmis kurios nors ir nėra neteisėtos gali sutrukdyti procesą ir neleisti kitiems kreditoriams išreikšti savo tikrosios valios. Šias problemas būtų labai sunku išspręsti papildomu reguliavimo įstatymų lygyje nes nepaveikiamiems kreditoriams palankesnis dispozityvus reguliavimas galėtų išbalansuoti interesus. Ir restruktūrizavimo institutą padaryti mažiau efektyvų. Todėl teismo vaidmuo yra dar svarbesnis ir bet koks reguliavimo pakeitimas turėtų siekti jį įgalinti.
Restructuring a legal entity is a process meant to assist companies in resolving or preventing solvency problems. It’s aimed at revitalizing the company at a time when it has encountered financial difficulties. In order to assist companies that are going through restructuring, the regulation empowers them to use tools that can help them achieve the above-mentioned goal. These tools include, but are not limited to, the deferral or reduction of liabilities, the reorganization of the company's activities, protection from creditors, and the application of other rights and economic measures to avoid bankruptcy and restore the company's activity. Restructuring is a collective process involving the interests of many stakeholders, but the main objective is the satisfaction of creditors' claims, which is essential for the restoration of the company's solvency. The process allows companies in financial difficulties to preserve jobs and continue their activities while protecting the interests of creditors, the company, and employees. The successful implementation and execution of the restructuring plan depends on the management of the interests of the groups involved, with creditors paying particular attention. Lithuania, through its history, had two restructured law-regulating codes; the first was active for just under 20 years. A few years ago, the EU Directive brought about significant changes to the restructuring plan approval process in Lithuania. The new regulation is more similar to one established in the US. Under the new directive, both affected and unaffected creditors are included in the voting process. However, only impaired creditors are allowed to vote on the approval of the plan, while unimpaired creditors are unable to express their opinion. This can raise legal issues if unimpaired creditors are not given the right to vote, as there may still be situations where the failure to successfully achieve the objectives of the restructuring plan can affect their obligations. In the restructuring process, the court plays a crucial role in Lithuania. Even though Lithuania does not have strict creditor regulatory rules like those established in the United States, the Court still ensures the interests of creditors are protected. In the US, this type of voting procedure is in practice for decades now, so it can be used as a case study. One gray area practice that has occurred in the US is the so called "artificial impairment" strategy, which allows companies to pick creditors who can vote on a restructuring plan. This practice can be harmful in the process because it may cause a situation in which creditors who shouldn’t be able to vote do so and, in this way, affect the rights of other creditors involved. In theory, unimpaired creditors should not be allowed to be involved in decisions that have no impact on them. Another questionable practice is “slight impairment.” US courts have had rulings that make certain creditors 5 who are impaired, unimpaired, and so ineligible to vote for or against the plan. Given that restructuring involves multiple parties with differing interests, the Court needs to have the necessary authority granted by existing regulations. This is why the laws governing the restructuring process in Lithuania, such as the JANĮ, are not specifically described in great detail. The main role of the Court is to ensure that the restructuring is carried out in a manner that is fair to all participants, including creditors, and upholds their rights and interests to the greatest extent possible. It is important for all participants, including creditors and others involved in the restructuring process, to be able to express their views and opinions in a fair and transparent manner. This ensures that the restructuring objectives are achieved equitably and that the rights of all parties are protected. The Court's involvement in the process helps to balance the interests of all participants and ensures that the restructuring is conducted in a manner that is in line with established regulations and legal principles. Overall, the EU Directive has brought about significant changes to the restructuring process in Lithuania. The inclusion of both impaired and unimpaired creditors in the plan approval process, as well as the active role of the Court in safeguarding the interests of all participants, has contributed to a more equitable and transparent restructuring process. While there may be legal challenges surrounding the rights of unimpaired creditors to express their will, it is essential for all parties involved to have the opportunity to express their views and opinions. This ensures that the restructuring process is conducted in a fair and just manner while upholding the rights and interests of all participants.