Articles

Presumptions in opening the rehabilitation procedures in the French legal system

Received: 16.03.2023 Published: 15.03.2023

EDN: RMSDUU DOI: 10.22394/2070-8378-2023-25-2-109-118

Full text

Abstract

This article examines the key issues concerning opening rehabilitation procedures in the French legal system. The author examines the presumptions for consolidating or rebutting the need for procedures aimed at the debtor’s welfare. The rehabilitation procedure has economicand legal aspects, which are interconnected. The first comes down to the fact that the rehabilitative procedure depends on the structure of the debtor’s assets and capital. The legal ground is the presumption of the need for a rehabilitation procedure. Usually, the economic criterion consists of simple rules guiding the judge: businesses that participate in soft or hard oligopoly markets cannot be liquidated immediately because they would cause significant harm to the economy (except in declining economic sectors); representatives of markets with monopolistic competition do not generally affect a large number of people and do not make significant superprofits, so their liquidation would not cause considerable harm to the economy. The presumption of the need for rehabilitation is rebutted byprocedural means of proof. Creditors must provide evidence that payments have been suspended on their claims and that the financial statements show the structure of assets and liabilities of the debtor’s property can be considered insolvent.

Keywords

Received: 16 March 2023

How to cite

Для цитирования:

Ионцев М.А. Презумпции при открытии реабилитационных процедур в правопорядке Французской Республики // Государственная служба. 2023. Т. 25, № 2. С. 109–118. https://doi.org/10.22394/2070-8378-2023-25-2-109-118

For citation:

Iontsev M.A. Presumptions in opening the rehabilitation procedures in the French legal system // Gosudarstvennaya Sluzhba. 2023. Vol. 25, no. 2. P. 109–118. https://doi.org/10.22394/2070-8378-2023-25-2-109-118

Share

How to Cite

Iontsev M.A. Presumptions in opening the rehabilitation procedures in the French legal system // Gosudarstvennaya Sluzhba. 2023. Vol. 25, no. 2. P. 109–118. https://doi.org/10.22394/2070-8378-2023-25-2-109-118

Коды статьи

  • EDN RMSDUU
  • Тип статьи (РИНЦ) Научная статья (Научная статья)

References

  1. Бобылева А.З., Горев Д.Е., Зайцева Ю.А. Механизмы банкротства и их роль в обеспечении благосостояния человека: монография / отв. ред. С.А. Карелина, И.В. Фролов. М.: Юстицинформ, 2022.
  2. Мохова Е.В. Компетентный суд и применимое право при привлечении директора должника к ответственности в трансграничном банкротстве. 2018. Закон. № 7. С. 86–106.
  3. Bandrac M. La nature juridique de la prescription extinctive en matière civile. Paris, 1986.
  4. Bonhomme B., Pérochon F. Entreprises en difficulté – Instruments de crédit et de paiement, 8e édition, LGDJ, 2009.
  5. Boutiron P-J., Castanet B. Cheuvreux et autres, L’entrepreneur et ses patrimoines, Lextenso éditions, 2012.
  6. Chartier Y. La désignation des représentants des personnes morales qui exercent une action en justice, note sous Ch. mixte, 22 février 2002, Bulletin, Ch. mixte, no 1, p. 1. Revue des sociétés, no 2, avril-juin 2002, p. 293.
  7. Chopard B. Analyse économique du droit des entreprises en difficulté, Actualité jurisprudentielle, 2002.
  8. Dubreuil B., Mestre J. La purge des dettes. Rev. proc. collect., 1989.
  9. Duquesne F. Le tribunal de grande instance face au licenciement économique collectif. Droit social. 2002. No 6. P. 606–616.
  10. Gerbi L. L’optimisation patrimoniale à l’épreuve des risques d’organisation d’insolvabilité (aspects de droit interne français). Thèse de doctorat en Droit, Soutenue en 2006 à Paris 9, Sous la direction de Bernard Grelon.
  11. Gounon S. L’insolvabilité en droit privé. Thèse de doctorat en Droit, Soutenue en 2004 à Lyon 3 Sous la direction de Jacqueline Rubellin-Devichi.
  12. Jacquemont A. Droit des entreprises en difficulté, 4eme éd, 2006, Litec – Editions du JurisClasseur.
  13. Lambert-Faivre Y. Le Droit du dommage corporel: systèmes d’indemnisation, 3ème éd, Paris, Dalloz, 1996.
  14. Lebel Ch. Conversion du redressement en liquidation judiciaire: audition de l’Ordre des médecins (non). Revue des procédures collectives. 2010. No 5, septembre-octobre, commentaire no 198, p. 54, note à propos de Com. 6 juillet.
  15. Lienhard. Clôture pour insuffisance d’actif: compensation de plein droit, note sous Com. – 8 juillet 2008.
  16. Recueil Dalloz, 4 septembre 2008, Actualité jurisprudentielle, p. 2072.
  17. Marraud G. des Grottes. Privilège, déclaration de créance incomplète et rôle du jugecommissaire. Revue Lamy droit civil. No 96, septembre 2012, Actualités, no 4781, p. 32, note à propos de Com. – 5 juin 2012.
  18. Martin-Serf. Le droit communautaire de la faillite. Une construction laborieuse et complexe (Colloque de Deauville des 3 et 4 avril 2004: entreprises en difficulté: un nouvel essai. Moins de liquidations par plus de prévention. Mythe ou réalité?). Revue de jurisprudence commerciale, hors série. 2004. P. 145–159.
  19. Oberdorff H. Droits de l’homme et libertés fondamentales, 5e édition, L. G. D. J, 2015.
  20. Remery J.-P. Le Ministère public et le droit des entreprises en difficulté: un an de jurisprudence commerciale de la Cour de cassation. Recueil Dalloz no 11 du 15 mars 2012, spèc. No 2 p. 702, à propos de Com. 31 janvier 2012.
  21. Rolland B. Difficulté des entreprises: excès de pouvoir (non). Revue Procédures. 2010. No 7, juillet, commentaire no 286, p. 31, note à propos de Com. – 11 mai 2010.
  22. Saada J., Xifaras M. Jurisprudence – Revue critique 2016. Le droit, entre théorie et critique, Université de Savoie.
  23. Saint-Alary-Houin C. Droit des entreprises en difficulté, 9e édition, Domat 10ème édition, 2016.
  24. Bandrac M. The legal nature of extinction prescription in civil matters. Paris, 1986. In French
  25. Bobyleva A.Z., Gorev D.E., Zaitseva Yu.A. Bankruptcy mechanisms and their role in ensuring human well-being: monograph / Edited by S.A. Karelina, I.V. Frolov. Moscow: Yustitsinform, 2022. In Russian
  26. Bonhomme B., Pérochon F. Companies in difficulties – credit and payment instruments. 8th edition. LGDJ, 2009. In French
  27. Boutiron P-J., Castanet B. Cheuvreux and others. The entrepreneur and his heritage. Lextenso editions, 2012. In French
  28. Chartier Y. Appointment of representatives of legal persons taking legal action, note under Ch. mixte. February 22, 2002. Bulletin, Ch. mixte. No. 1. P. 1. Revue des Sociétés. No. 2. April-June 2002. P. 293. In French
  29. Chopard B. Economic analysis of the law of companies in difficulties. Actualités jurisprudentielles, 2002. In French
  30. Dubreuil B., Mestre J. The purge of debts. Rev. proc. collection. 1989. In French
  31. Duquesne F. The tribunal de grande instance faced collective redundancy. Droit social. 2002. No. 6. P. 606–616. In French
  32. Gerbi L. Asset optimization is put to the test by organizational insolvency risks (aspects of French domestic law). Dissertation of Doctor of Law, 2006. Paris. Under the direction of Bernard Grelon. In French
  33. Gounon S. Insolvency in private law. Dissertation of Doctor of Law, 2004. Lyon. Under the direction of Jacqueline Rubellin-Devichi. In French
  34. Jacquemont A. Law of companies in difficulties. 4th edition. 2006. Litec – Editions du JurisClasseur. In French
  35. Lambert-Faivre Y. The law of bodily injury: compensation systems. 3rd edition. Paris, Dalloz, 1996. In French
  36. Lebel Ch. Conversion of the recovery into compulsory liquidation:
  37. hearing a doctors’ order. Review of collective procedures. 2010. No. 5, September-October. Commentary No. 198, p. 54. July, 6. In French
  38. Lienhard. Closing for insufficiency of assets: automatic compensation. July 8, 2008. Dalloz collection. September 4, 2008. Actualité jurisprudentielle. P. 2072. In French
  39. Marraud G. des Grottes. Privilege, declaration of incomplete claim, and role of the judge-commissioner. Revue Lamy droit civil. No. 96. September 2012. Actualités, No. 4781. P. 32. June 5, 2012. In French
  40. Martin-Serf. Community bankruptcy law. A laborious and complex construction (Deauville Colloquium of April 3 and 4, 2004: companies in difficulties: a new attempt. Fewer liquidations through more prevention. Myth or reality?). Revue de jurisprudence commerciale, hors série. 2004. P. 145–159. In French
  41. Mokhova E.V. Jurisdiction and applicable law for directors’ liability in cross-border insolvency cases. 2018. Zakon. No. 7. P. 86–106. In Russian
  42. Oberdorff H. Human rights and fundamental freedoms. 5th edition. LGDJ, 2015. In French
  43. Remery J.-P. The Public Ministry and the law of companies in difficulties: a year of commercial case law from the Court of Cassation. Collection Dalloz No. 11 of March 15, 2012. No. 2. P. 702. January 31, 2012. In French
  44. Rolland B. Business difficulty: excess of power. Review Procedures. 2010. No. 7. July. Commentary No. 286, P. 31. May 11, 2010. In French
  45. Saada J., Xifaras M. Jurisprudence – critical review 2016. Law, between theory and criticism. Université de Savoie. In French
  46. Saint-Alary-Houin C. Law of companies in difficulties, 9th edition. Domat 10th edition, 2016. In French

Most read articles by the same author(s)