creditor protection | In Principle

Go to content
Subscribe to newsletter
In principle newsletter subscription form

creditor protection

Protecting investors from unlawful behaviour by founders of startups
According to analysts, only 10% of startups are successful. Almost 90% of them fail—20% in their first year. On the record, such failures are often attributed to the founders’ failure to identify the customers’ needs, i.e. a real gap in the market, or blamed on competition and the uniqueness of the service or product. In less guarded moments, e.g. in online forums, much heavier accusations have been levelled against founders, such as the claim that most startups are designed to defraud investors or launder money.
Protecting investors from unlawful behaviour by founders of startups
Compensation from a developer who despite a preliminary contract sells the property to another person
Residential real estate prices in Poland have been rising steadily for many years. A house or apartment promised to be built or sold just a few months earlier may now have a market price much higher than on the date of signing of the preliminary contract. This may tempt some developers to renege on the final contract and instead sell the unit to another purchaser at a higher price. In such a case, what relief can the frustrated buyer obtain against the developer?
Compensation from a developer who despite a preliminary contract sells the property to another person
What is a commercial transaction?
The question might seem simple. The payment gridlock regulations (the EU’s Late Payment Directive and, in Poland, the Act on Combating Excessive Delays in Commercial Transactions) apply to commercial transactions. Although the regulations have been in force for more than a decade, in practice they still raise numerous doubts.
What is a commercial transaction?
When a debtor starts litigation to avoid paying a debt—continued
It is worthwhile for creditors to take part in litigation even if the outcome could go against them. This way, they can help prevent the court from issuing rulings sought by colluding debtors and their allies.
When a debtor starts litigation to avoid paying a debt—continued
When a debtor starts litigation to avoid paying a debt
Dishonest debtors are increasingly daring to use court proceedings to fictitiously dispose of funds to pay their debts. They believe that if they obtain a final judgment that orders them, for example, to pay an amount to a third party, the creditor will not be able to contest the payment. But is the creditor completely defenceless? With this article, we are kicking off a series on what to pay attention to and how to react when a debtor initiates court proceedings that may render the debtor insolvent.
When a debtor starts litigation to avoid paying a debt
Maintenance for the debtor’s relatives may be considered injurious to creditors
Acts by a debtor benefitting a third party—a family member entitled to maintenance—can violate the interests of other creditors and frustrate their ability to satisfy their claims from the debtor’s assets. This entitles creditors to seek legal protection under Art. 527–534 of the Polish Civil Code. A fraudulent transfer claim against a third party can be used to set aside a deed establishing a maintenance obligation.
Maintenance for the debtor’s relatives may be considered injurious to creditors
A debtor disposes of assets before the debt falls due: Can the creditor pursue a fraudulent transfer claim against a third party?
An investor and a contractor sign a construction contract. Before the contractor begins work, the investor disposes of valuable assets, from which the contractor could satisfy its claim for the fee, but the fee will not be due until completion of the work. In that situation, can the contractor take advantage of the broad protection of a fraudulent transfer claim against a third party?
A debtor disposes of assets before the debt falls due: Can the creditor pursue a fraudulent transfer claim against a third party?
Establishing the invalidity of a fraudulent agreement as an alternative to ruling it ineffective under Civil Code Art. 59
A year has passed since a counterparty entered into an agreement with a third party preventing actual performance of a contract previously entered into with the counterparty. Thus the one-year time limit under Art. 59 of the Polish Civil Code has already expired. Is there still any chance to eliminate from legal circulation a fraudulent transaction that harms the creditor?
Establishing the invalidity of a fraudulent agreement as an alternative to ruling it ineffective under Civil Code Art. 59
Acknowledgement of debt: What does the debtor’s behaviour mean?
Recently, the Supreme Court of Poland commented on the subject of acknowledgement of debt, and at the same time gave some general guidance on how to interpret a debtor’s statements and behaviour. This is a key practical issue, as action by the debtor can cause interruption of running of the statute of limitations on the claim. Therefore, debtors should be cautious about what they state to creditors. Conversely, in many cases, creditors can take advantage of the debtor’s behaviour to improve their legal position.
Acknowledgement of debt: What does the debtor’s behaviour mean?
Creditor Protection—a new vortal
With creditors in mind, we have launched a new special-interest service on our website, Creditor Protection, devoted entirely to what creditors can do when debtors unlawfully evade payment of their debts or performance of other obligations.
Creditor Protection—a new vortal
Fraudulent transfer claim against a third party: A basic instrument for protecting creditors against debtors’ insolvency
The deepening crisis of debtor honesty means that today, more than ever, creditors face the risk that debtors will not only fail to pay their debts voluntarily, but will hinder enforcement by transferring assets to third parties. In such situations, a fraudulent transfer claim against the third party (sometimes called a “Pauline action”), known and applied in legal systems of many countries around the world, comes to the creditor’s rescue.
Fraudulent transfer claim against a third party: A basic instrument for protecting creditors against debtors’ insolvency
When the other party seeks to prevent performance of a contract
After conclusion of a preliminary agreement for sale or long-term tenancy of real estate, the owner refuses to conclude the final agreement, instead selling the property to another buyer or delivering the property to another tenant. Or imagine a contract for future delivery of rare, hard-to-find components essential for manufacturing, where the seller then enters into another contract promising to supply a direct competitor, preventing the supply to the original buyer. In such situations, does the original buyer have a claim other than for monetary damages for breach of contract, or can it enforce performance of the original contract?
When the other party seeks to prevent performance of a contract