Insolvency. Replacement of the judicial liquidator as a punishment. A difference as compared to other legal institutions regulated by Law no. 85/2014

DREPTUL AFACERILOR

Abstract

Considering that, as regards the creditor, it has exercised its right of majority creditor to appoint a judicial liquidator [art. 57 paragraph (3) of Law no. 85/2014 – on 18 February 2016], and its replacement took place after the sanction according to law, by the insolvency judge, according to art. 57 paragraph (4) of Law no. 85/2014 (ex officio), a procedural moment in which the majority creditor cannot benefit anymore from the right to decide the person by which it should replace the judicial liquidator unsuccessfully appointed in the plan of the insolvency procedure, an issue which is equivalent to a lack of due diligence of the majority creditor in selecting the liquidator which should manage the insolvency procedure, and no possible similarity between those two legal institutions may be ascertained.