Примеры использования Suspect period на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Establishing the suspect period.
A longer suspect period might be desirable in case of fraud or intermingling of assets.
Paragraph(3)- extension of suspect period.
Calculation of the suspect period in substantive consolidation paras.
This common date could simplify compliance with deadlines and the calculation of the suspect period for avoidance purposes.
The specified date from which the suspect period is calculated retroactively in accordance with recommendation 89 may be.
As a matter of drafting,it was noted that the recommendation should refer to the calculation of the suspect period"retroactively.
The degree of specificity of the recommendation would help to avoid the suspect period being unjustifiably extended or shortened where substantive consolidation occurred.
Various views were expressed as to the determination of the period prior to commencement during which transactions would be subject to avoidance the"suspect period.
Draft recommendation 229: calculation of the suspect period in substantive consolidation.
Reasons therefor included the need to establish special,derogatory rules for those transactions both as to evidentiary issues and the duration of the suspect period.
Reorganization","sale as a going concern" and"suspect period" without amendment;
The insolvency law may specify that the suspect period for avoidable transactions involving related persons is longer than for transactions with unrelated persons.
Opposition was voiced against the court being able to extend the duration of the suspect period, as provided in paragraph 3.
The suspect period was supposed to be short, but if the debtor were to delay the commencement in order to orchestrate the extinguishment of the suspect period, it would then not be possible to review previous financial transactions.
Moreover, draft recommendation 229 addressed calculation of the suspect period when substantive consolidation was ordered.
Enforcement is not to be barred if the collateral provider becomes subject to insolvency proceedings;certain arrangements are also to be immune from insolvency rules affecting the validity of transactions effected in the suspect period.
In response, it was pointed out that the Legislative Guide recommended that the date from which the suspect period would be calculated should be stipulated in the insolvency law.
The insolvency law should specify the date from which the suspect period with respect to avoidance of transactions of the type referred to in recommendation 87 should be calculated when substantive consolidation is ordered with respect to two or more enterprise group members.
Concern was expressed that draft recommendation 229 provided unnecessary detail by specifying the different ways of calculating the suspect period in substantive consolidation.
It was pointed out, however,that since recommendation 90 referred only to the length of the suspect period for transactions with related persons, additional provisions might be needed for such transactions in the corporate group context.
Commencement of multiple proceedings on the basis of a joint application should also facilitate coordination of those proceedings; the commencement date, and any other dates calculated by reference to that date,such as those relating to the suspect period, would be the same for each member.
Mr. Redmond(Observer for the American Bar Association), commenting on paragraph 159,noted that the suspect period might begin either prior to the application for commencement, or prior to the commencement itself.
It would seem that the time of the assignment is important for determining priority and for determining whether an assignment could be set aside as a fraudulent orpreferential transfer if made within a certain time period before the commencement of an insolvency proceeding'the suspect period.
The Insolvency Guide discusses categories of transactions subject to avoidance, the suspect period, conduct of avoidance proceedings and liability of counterparties to avoided transactions see part two, chap. II, paras. 148-203.
In response, it was observed that subparagraph(b)(ii) did no more than state the usual approach based on subparagraph(a) andrecommendation 89 of the Legislative Guide, that there would be a suspect period with respect to each member of the group subject to insolvency proceedings.
The UNCITRAL Insolvency Guide discusses categories of transactions subject to avoidance, the suspect period, conduct of avoidance proceedings and liability of counterparties to avoided transactions see part two, chapter II, paras. 148-203 and recommendations 87-99 of that Guide.
Those included an obligation of the debtor not to leave its habitual residence; to provide information on any ongoing court or administrative proceedings, including enforcement proceedings; to surrender property andbusiness records; and to provide information on transactions occurring during the suspect period.
The recommendations with respect to related person transactions, however,addressed only the issue of the suspect period(recommendation 90) and the need for specification of the categories of persons to be treated as persons related to the debtor recommendation 91.
One approach to the burden of proof in the case of transactions with related persons, for example, might be to provide that the requisite intent or bad faith is deemed orpresumed to exist where certain types of transactions are undertaken within the suspect period and the counterparty to the transaction will have the burden of proving otherwise.