In January 2015 two Supreme Court precedents indicated that assets subject to floating charges should be valued at their feasible liquidation value; however, under these precedents, the valuation terms were somewhat ambiguous and certain liquidation costs remained undetermined. The court's latest precedent addresses the equal treatment of creditors in both restructuring and bankruptcy proceedings and clearly improves the predictability of floating charges as securities in the former.
Generally, Finnish insolvency legislation has been stable and proven effective over the past decade. However, owing to technological advancements and recent bankruptcies involving businesses affecting the environment, there is a growing need to fine-tune bankruptcy proceedings and environmental liabilities in bankruptcies. After two years of research, an expert group established by the Ministry of Justice has published a report on these issues.
The tax issues of a bankruptcy estate and the creditors differ depending on whether the bankruptcy estate continues the previous business of the debtor company. The effects of a debtor's bankruptcy on the creditor's taxation may be particularly significant where the creditor is a lessor to the debtor. Pursuant to legislation, a bankruptcy estate is, in principle, entitled to choose whether to conduct activity liable to value added tax provided that it does not continue the debtor's business.
A court-approved restructuring programme can be amended only if the preconditions of the Restructuring of Enterprises Act are met. Generally, the contents of an approved programme may be amended with the acceptance of all the creditors whose rights would be violated by an amendment. However, the precondition of the debtors' acceptance is problematic when the amount of a restructuring debt is determined to be substantially more than that originally entered into the restructuring programme.
The Supreme Court recently set a precedent regarding the liabilities of a bankruptcy estate in a case that concerned maintenance charges of a limited liability golf company. The legal question subject to the precedent was whether the maintenance charge receivables of the golf company in connection with the golf company's shares were liabilities of the bankruptcy estate.