MIL OSI Translation. Region: Germany / Deutschland –
Source: CDU CSU
December 17, 2020
Bundestag decides to shorten the residual debt discharge procedure
The deputy chairman of the CDU / CSU parliamentary group, Thorsten Frei, and the chairman of the legal and consumer protection working group, Dr. Jan-Marco Luczak:
Thorsten Frei: “With the law passed today, debtors in financial distress get a second chance more easily: After all, anyone who has to go through personal bankruptcy – often through no fault of their own, for example due to a serious illness – should keep the prospect of a fresh start. With the new regulation, which implements European law, the debtor can participate in economic life again after three years. So that there is no abuse here, we have set appropriate limits for the assets to be spared: the debtor may keep occasional gifts and profits of low value despite the bankruptcy. In this way, an appropriate balance is achieved between the interests of the contractual partner and the interests of the debtor himself. “
Dr. Jan-Marco Luczak: “With the law to shorten the residual debt discharge procedure, we are now also passing a regulation on the distribution of risks in commercial leases during the corona pandemic. Businesses in particular have to accept tough cuts in the course of combating the corona pandemic. Restaurants or hotels are no longer allowed to have guests, clubs are no longer allowed to open their doors to dance, and the number of customers in retail is limited. For many companies this means massive loss of income while their fixed costs such as rent or lease continue to run. Despite numerous government aid measures, many are in dire economic need. We are now strengthening their backs and giving them legal security. We make it clear that state measures to combat the corona pandemic can represent a serious change in the basis of the contract if they significantly impair the usability of the rented rooms. The law now assumes this in principle. As a Union, it was important to us that we did not interfere in the risk distribution contractually agreed between the parties and that we did not prefer one part of it unilaterally. In this respect, it always depends on the individual case. With the clarification, however, commercial tenants have a better negotiating position, which clears the way for individual negotiation solutions. Because those affected need help as quickly as possible, we have also ensured that legal proceedings in this context must be accelerated and given priority in the future. “
EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is a translation. Apologies should the grammar and / or sentence structure not be perfect.