Gegenseitige Verträge nach Aufhebung des Insolvenzverfahrens

The insolvency law is one of the core components of the comprehensive body of legislation that ensures the confidence of the legal community in a legal system. It regulates the conditions of widespread debtor liability and at the same time defines the framework within which creditors can expect their rights to be preserved through a reorganization and recapitalization of the indebted company. The actual effect of the insolvency law does not end at a country's borders. Insolvency proceedings are structured according to the right to have universally applicable validity. Joint legislation on cross-border insolvency proceedings is now in effect in the form of intrastate legislation in almost all member states of the European Union. This shared European legislation is impacting intrastate reform processes and influencing the insolvency legislation. Furthermore, the intrastate legislation is being influenced by the UNCITRAL-Model law. Academic debate is increasingly concerned with the convergence movement that has been triggered as a result. Practical applications require legal dogmatic clarification of the increasingly complex regulations of insolvency legislation, and information on structures and problems of foreign European and extra-European insolvency laws, as well as and in particular with regard to its interaction with German laws. The DZWIR publication series is a forum of these discussions. It is being published as a series of monographic examinations of fundamental questions on German, European and international insolvency legislation. As such, this series contributes to the legal dogmatic clarification of disputes as well as to the promotion of European integration of national insolvency legislation.

As a central provision of the substantive insolvency law, § 103 of the InsO [Insolvency Statute] is of great practical importance. When an insolvency proceeding is opened, the insolvency administrator is often required to decide on the type of settlement for a number of mutual "provisional" contracts, meaning contracts not completely fulfilled by any party. This applies in particular for company insolvencies. In the past, the insolvency administrator's right of election was already a common subject matter of scholarly works. However, only the legal position within the insolvency proceeding stood at the center of these investigations. Therefore, the goal of the present work is the investigation of the legal position existing between the parties to the contract after the insolvency proceeding is cancelled either after complete final distribution or after an insolvency plan comes into effect. The starting point is the fundamentally tense relationship between the contractual law of obligations and substantive insolvency law, and the associated question regarding the effects of the opening of the proceeding on the claims for fulfillment that are still open. The author presents the problems that arise with the application of the latest BGH [German Federal Supreme Court] judicature, according to which the opening of the proceeding affects only the "enforceability" of the claims for fulfillment, and offers solution recommendations. Particularly relevant in practice are the difficulties that result from the renunciation of the "forfeiture theory" when the insolvency reorganization plans go into effect.

Autorentext

Thomas Rühle , Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel.

Inhalt
A)Gegenstand der Arbeit · B)Behandlung gegenseitiger Austauschverträge in der Insolvenz nach § 103 InsO · C)Wirkung der Verfahrenseröffnung und Wahlrechtsausübung bzw. -verwirkung auf gegenseitige schwebende Verträge · D)Auswirkungen des Wahlrechts auf die Rechtslage nach Aufhebung des Verfahrens infolge vollzogener Schlussverteilung gem. § 200 Abs. 1 InsO · E)Auswirkungen des Wahlrechts auf die Rechtslage nach Aufhebung des Verfahrens infolge rechtskräftigen Insolvenzplans gem. § 258 Abs. 1 InsO · F)Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse