Voting Thresholds In Insolvency.
Introduction
Voting thresholds in insolvency refer to the minimum level of approval required from creditors to pass resolutions on matters such as restructuring plans, liquidation proposals, or standstill agreements. These thresholds are crucial for ensuring that decisions reflect the collective interests of creditors while protecting minority stakeholders.
In India, voting thresholds are primarily governed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, and similar principles exist under international insolvency and corporate laws.
2. Purpose of Voting Thresholds
Ensure Creditor Consensus: Avoids decisions imposed by a small minority of creditors.
Fair Treatment: Protects minority creditors from unfair treatment.
Legitimacy of Restructuring Plans: Court or tribunal approvals require threshold compliance.
Operational Feasibility: Facilitates implementable and enforceable plans.
Risk Management: Ensures creditors collectively assume responsibility for outcomes.
Legal Compliance: Prevents challenges based on improper or insufficient creditor approval.
3. Legal Principles
Class-Based Voting: Secured and unsecured creditors often vote separately.
Majority by Value: Typically, 66% (two-thirds) or 75% approval by creditor value is required under IBC.
Number-Based Voting: Some statutes require majority by number of creditors, especially for procedural matters.
Quorum Requirement: Voting is valid only if a minimum proportion of creditors attend the meeting.
Court Oversight: Courts or tribunals may validate or reject resolutions that do not meet statutory thresholds.
Binding Effect: Once the required threshold is met, decisions are binding on all creditors in that class.
4. Key Case Laws
1. Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India
Principle: Approval of corporate insolvency resolution plans requires at least 66% voting by value of creditors in each class.
Impact: Validated the statutory voting threshold and class-based segregation.
2. Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank
Principle: Voting thresholds must be strictly adhered to; failure invalidates creditor resolutions.
Impact: Court rejected a restructuring plan where insufficient creditor value participated.
3. Jaypee Infratech Ltd. Case
Principle: Class-based voting ensures minority creditors are not prejudiced by majority decisions.
Impact: Reinforced segregation between secured and unsecured creditors for voting purposes.
4. Amtek Auto Ltd. v. ICICI Bank
Principle: Thresholds apply not just to approval, but also to modifications of existing plans.
Impact: Minorities cannot be forced into changes unless statutory thresholds are satisfied.
5. Essar Steel India Ltd. v. ArcelorMittal
Principle: Court oversight ensures that voting thresholds are not manipulated and that resolutions are fair.
Impact: Validated resolutions where proper quorum and thresholds were observed.
6. Official Liquidator v. Amritsar Foundry Pvt. Ltd.
Principle: Voting thresholds apply in liquidation meetings for approval of asset sale and distribution plans.
Impact: Reinforced that thresholds protect both procedural integrity and creditor rights.
5. Practical Takeaways
Always verify the class of creditors before calculating votes.
Ensure both value-based and number-based thresholds are considered, if applicable.
Maintain proper records of votes and quorum for legal enforceability.
Include minority protections in plan documentation to avoid litigation.
Courts or insolvency tribunals can invalidate resolutions that fail threshold requirements.
Voting thresholds are key to legitimacy, enforceability, and fairness in insolvency processes.
RELATED Blog
comments