Legal Insights — EN

Is Bankruptcy an Appropriate Route Against a Company That Does Not Pay?

Learn why bankruptcy is not appropriate for every debtor or recovery file and why company records, the claim, and costs require review.
A junction branching from a non-paying company model into individual and collective enforcement routes

Bankruptcy and Concordat

Prepared by:

Bankruptcy and Concordat

A Debtor Subject to Bankruptcy and the Appropriate Application

Non-payment does not invariably permit bankruptcy. First identify whether the debtor is subject to bankruptcy and whether the selected route's conditions are met. The company's legal form, registry position, and claim nature matter. Bankruptcy does not have the same consequences as a bank attachment concerning only you.

The Claim and Application Requirements

Bankruptcy following enforcement differs from statutory direct-bankruptcy grounds. A single online petition saying the company does not pay is insufficient. Secured claims require separate examination of the route and exceptions. Existing proceedings, decisions, and debtor objections affect strategy.

Consequences for the Creditor

Initial expenses, litigation, other creditors, and potential liquidation outcomes must be considered together. Visible assets differ from value available after prior rights. Personal recourse against a shareholder or director does not automatically arise from company financial distress; it needs its own legal basis and evidence.

Let Us Assess the File and Recovery Options

Prepare claim documents, trade registry information, and existing enforcement decisions together. Compare bankruptcy costs and other routes against actual assets and prior rights; no route guarantees recovery of value that does not exist.

Legal Grounds