25.11.2022

Reformed Restructuring of Enterprises Act to simplify restructuring proceedings and prevent abuse

The Restructuring of Enterprises Act has been under reform during this Government’s term in office. The reform that entered into force this summer implemented the EU Directive on Restructuring and Insolvency into national law. The amendments currently being discussed concern developments on a national level. Their goal is to simplify restructuring proceedings and prevent abusing the system. The government proposal was submitted to Parliament on 3 November 2022, and the proposed Acts are intended to enter into force in the spring of 2023.

Reforms aim at streamlining restructuring proceedings

The reforms of the Restructuring of Enterprises Act aim in particular at strengthening the operating conditions of SMEs, streamlining and simplifying restructuring proceedings, promoting businesses’ possibility for restructuring proceedings early enough, and preventing abuses relating to restructuring proceedings. In addition, the new Act facilitates accessing accelerated restructuring proceedings and terminating certain contracts to which the debtor is party.

Administrator’s preliminary estimate to replace financial report on debtor

The government proposal includes replacing the financial report on debtor with a preliminary estimate carried out by an administrator. In the preliminary estimate, a court-appointed administrator establishes the debtor’s assets, liabilities and other commitments as well as the circumstances affecting the debtor’s financial situation and its expected development.

In addition, within a month of the commencement of restructuring proceedings, the administrator must also provide the committee of creditors, the debtor, the major creditors and, upon requests, the other creditors with

The current report on debtor has been criticised especially for not really being able to add to the information on the debtor that is already included in the application. As the applications for restructuring proceedings must be drafted carefully, it is easy to agree with the proposed report reform. The reform simplifies considerably the administrator’s duties at the beginning of the restructuring proceedings, allowing the administrator to focus on drafting a restructuring programme and rehabilitating the business.

Terminating certain contracts to be allowed in restructuring proceedings

 

A debtor may terminate certain contracts it has entered into before the commencement of restructuring proceedings if such termination is necessary for the execution of the restructuring. This concerns contracts under which the debtor is committed to a non-monetary obligation and which the debtor has not fulfilled when the restructuring commences. The contracts may be terminated upon approval of the restructuring programme irrespective of their term or notice period. As an example of such contracts, the government proposal mentions long-term contracts where the debtor’s obligation to render services remains similar for a long period of time. A potential compensation for premature termination would be restructuring debt – contingent restructuring debt, to be more precise – until the restructuring programme is approved and the termination enters into force. In addition, terms and conditions relying on restructuring proceedings would be prohibited. The legal state would therefore correspond with bankruptcy.

The proposed change reflects the European framework. In many countries, termination during restructuring proceedings is more flexible than in Finland. However, the proposed legislation still carries major uncertainties. With the extended right of termination, evaluating the amount of reasonable compensation payable to the contracting partner will become more frequent. In this respect, the government proposal refers to the section on lease or credit-lease agreements. As evaluating the reasonableness of compensation has been problematic for these agreement types, it is clear that the legal state surrounding the evaluation of reasonable compensation will remain unclear for a long time. Disputes concerning the amount of compensation also lend themselves to lengthening the restructuring proceedings. Moreover, it is clear that the proposed change impairs the position of certain contracting partners of debtors in restructuring proceedings.

Longer period for bringing actions for recovery

The government proposal also suggests extending the period during which actions for recovery must be brought from six months to a year. Both the administrator and the debtor must bring actions within a year of the commencement of the restructuring proceedings. This would align the periods for bringing an action of restructurings and bankruptcies. The amended Act would also lay down more precise rules on how the assets recovered with the administrator’s action should be retained and used. The provisions on the use of assets should be included in the restructuring programme.

Extending the period for bringing an action can be criticised as it does not promote streamlining restructuring proceedings. However, it is worth remembering that actions can be brought earlier as well, and the administrator must still actively look into grounds for actions as soon as the proceedings commence. This point of departure has also been noted in the government proposal.

Other changes

The government proposal also includes further amendments to the Act. As means to prevent abusing the system by filing unjustified restructuring applications, it is proposed that the processing of bankruptcy petitions is continued even if a restructuring application is filed simultaneously. However, the bankruptcy petition cannot be resolved before there is a decision on the commencement of the restructuring proceedings. If the restructuring application is denied or the proceedings are otherwise ordered to be terminated, the bankruptcy petition must be resolved.

This also applies in situations where a restructuring application has been initiated but a petition for the bankruptcy of the debtor is filed before resolving the matter. If the restructuring application and the bankruptcy petition have been filed at the same time and the restructuring proceedings are commenced, the bankruptcy petition lapses after the restructuring programme is approved.

The qualifications of administrators are also specified. In Finland, it has been deemed necessary to appoint an administrator also for early restructurings, and it is easy to agree with this approach.

The government proposal also includes a new section in the Act on declaring claims or additional demands after the due date set by the court. The new section aims to clarify the current legal state by unifying practices, as restructuring regulation would then align with the practice of retroactive lodgement of claims in bankruptcies.

The summary approval of restructuring programmes is also supported. In summary approval, the ordinary proceedings of the programme are disregarded and the programme is approved faster. Pursuant to the proposal, summary approval requires approval of the creditors whose claims total at least 70% of the overall total claims of the creditors (instead of the current 80%) as well as of each creditor whose claim is at least 10% of the overall total claims of the creditors (instead of the current 5%). It is difficult to estimate in advance what the practical effect of these changes in summary approval will be. Other procedural provisions are also fine-tuned to make the process more streamlined going forward.

Reforming the Act to continue

The European Commission is preparing a new directive on insolvency proceedings, expected to be adopted in early December. The directive will provide for recovery, the duties of directors in the event of insolvency and the rights of creditors in the event of a bankruptcy. 

Latest references

Our partner Pauliina Tenhunen acts as the administrator of the bankruptcy estate of European Battery Technologies Oy. The bankruptcy estate sold all assets of the bankrupt company, including its battery factory equipment and IP rights related to the operations. The equipment sold was the first of its kind in the 2010s and the factory was the first in Europe to produce LFP batteries. The buyer is Estonia and Germany-based Skeleton Technologies, a global developer and manufacturer of energy storage solutions. The buyer will continue operations in the premises rented by the bankrupt company in Varkaus, Finland. The owner of the premises is Keski-Savon Teollisuuskylä Oy, a company owned by the city of Varkaus. The bankruptcy administration is very pleased with this outcome as the continued operation of the battery factory was a priority also for the bankruptcy estate.
Case published 26.5.2023
We advised Litorina Capital, a Swedish private equity house, in the merger of two leading indoor playground chains in the Nordics, Leo’s Lekland and HopLop. Litorina IV fund, the main owner of Leo’s Lekland, and CapMan Special Situations I, the main owner of HopLop, agreed on an ownership arrangement that will unite Leo’s Lekland and HopLop into Europe’s leading indoor playground group. Both parties will continue their ownership in the new combined group. The HopLop chain continues to operate in Finland under the HopLop brand. The new group will be Europe’s largest family focused activity and exercise company. It has a total of 68 parks in Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Germany. Leo’s Lekland is the largest indoor playground chain in the Nordic countries, with a total of 50 parks in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland and Germany. There are 7 parks in Finland. HopLop is the largest children’s adventure and indoor playground chain and the most significant family focused activity and exercise company in Finland. There are 17 HopLop parks in Finland and 1 in Germany. Litorina is a private equity investment firm based in Stockholm, Sweden. It was founded in 1998. It invests in niche market leading companies with headquarters in the Nordics. Currently it has 13 portfolio companies.
Case published 2.2.2023
Relacom Finland Oy was declared bankrupt in 2019 upon the company’s own application. Relacom Finland Oy was one of the leading telecommunication services companies in Finland, and it had activities across Finland. The company offered, for example, installation and maintenance of telecommunication networks and power grids. When bankruptcy was declared, the company had around 400 employees. The bankruptcy proceedings were concluded in approximately three years, and the creditors approved the final settlement of accounts in December 2022. Attorney Pekka Jaatinen served as the administrator of the bankruptcy estate. After the beginning of the bankruptcy, the bankruptcy estate examined the company’s unfinished projects and finished them to the extent that was profitable. The rest of the projects were shut down in a controlled manner and handed over to the customer. Some of the projects were also socially important. The bankruptcy estate hired 112 of the company’s employees for fixed-term employment to finish projects and to ensure that the shutdown was carried out in a controlled manner. However, the bankruptcy administration did not continue the company’s business. The company’s fixed assets and inventories consisted of, among other things, various tools, equipment and several vehicles. The bankruptcy estate identified different options for efficient ways to liquidate assets, and selling was carried out in cooperation with an external liquidator. The liquidation result from finishing projects and selling the company’s movable property was significant and higher than the book value. Unsecured creditors accrued approximately 41% disbursements in the bankruptcy.
Case published 11.1.2023
Otso Gold Oy, an ore exploration and mining company, filed an application for initiating restructuring proceedings to the Oulu District Court on 3 December 2021. At that time, the company owned the Laivakangas gold mine, which is located in Raahe, Finland, on one of the biggest gold deposits in the Nordic countries. The company’s restructuring proceedings commenced on 17 February 2022, and the District Court ordered Attorney Pekka Jaatinen to serve as the administrator. At the time of commencement of the proceedings, the company was part of the Otso Gold group, whose Canadian parent company Otso Gold Corp is listed on the Toronto stock exchange. Due to the cross-border nature of the group, simultaneous restructuring applications were filed in Finland, Sweden and Canada. Otso Gold needed to carry out a financing and ownership arrangement in order to safeguard the continuation of its business and the fulfilment of its restructuring programme. Through the restructuring proceedings, Otso Gold was able to carry out a corporate transaction whereby the restructuring and the related proceedings were based on the sale of the company’s entire share capital to Pilar Gold Inc., a Canadian gold mining company. Simultaneously, Otso Gold was provided with financing for the implementation of the restructuring programme. Creditors representing over 93% of all debts of Otso Gold supported the restructuring programme based on the transaction concerning the entire company. The District Court of Oulu affirmed the one-day restructuring programme in October 2022 and appointed Attorney Pekka Jaatinen as supervisor of the programme.  The restructuring programme and its payment programme were carried out in their entirety approximately one week later, and the restructuring programme ended successfully on 17 November 2022.
Case published 29.12.2022