Category: Czech Republic

  • Clifford Chance Advises Banks on Financing for Heimstaden Czech

    Clifford Chance has advised a club of banks led by mandated lead arranger and sole global coordinator UniCredit Bank Czech Republic and Slovakia on their green and sustainability-linked long-term secured club financing for a Heimstaden Czech-owned residential portfolio in Ostrava and Pilsen.

    The financing is guaranteed by Heimstaden Czech Pilsen and Sweden’s Heimstaden Bostad. The lenders included arrangers Ceska Sporitelna, Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Intesa Sanpaolo, Komercni Banka, Raiffeisenbank, and Vseobecna Uverova Banka.

    Heimstaden describes itself as a European residential real estate investor and manager with a mission to acquire and manage friendly homes focusing on sustainable and commercially outstanding operations.

    According to Clifford Chance, the financing was provided in relation to a Czech residential portfolio located in Ostrava and Pilsen. “The funds will be used for liability management and to support sustainability investments such as thermal insulation, the installation of heat pumps, and a renewable fuel shift in Heimstaden Bostad’s Czech residential properties.”

    The Clifford Chance team included Partner Milos Felgr, Counsel Milan Rakosnik, Senior Associate Hana Cekalova, and Associates Ondrej Steco and Josef Lysonek.

    Clifford Chance did not respond to our inquiry on the matter.

  • Gomez-Acebo & Pombo and Perez-Llorca Advise on Energo Pro Spanish Expansion

    Gomez-Acebo & Pombo has advised Czech Republic-based Energo Pro on its expansion to Spain via the acquisition of Xallas Electricidad y Aleaciones (Xeal) and Feroe Ventures & Investments from Sixth Street. Perez-Llorca advised Sixth Street.

    The Energo-Pro Group was established in 1994 in the Czech Republic. Its business focuses on generation, distribution, and power trading. It operates hydropower plants and electrical distribution grids in Central and Eastern Europe, the Black Sea, and the Caucasus.

    Sixth Street is a global investment firm.

    According to Energo Pro, “this is one of the largest Czech investments in Spain. Xeal operates ten hydropower plants with a total capacity of 167 megawatts and two ferroalloy plants. Feroe has applied for the grant of a concession for a new pumped-storage plant with a planned capacity of 400 megawatts.”

    According to Gomez-Acebo & Pombo, “to finance the transaction, Energo-Pro has secured a EUR 300 million bridge loan from JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. With this transaction, the Czech Republic firm expands its operations in Galicia, making it one of the largest investments made in Spain by a Czech company.”

    The Gomez-Acebo & Pombo team included Partners Guillermo Guerra, Miguel Troncoso, Irene Fernandez-Puyol, and Carlos Vazquez, Of Counsel Jorge Martin, Lawyers Irene Carreno, Carlota Mazzucheli, and Cristina Maiia, and Associate Ruth Ereno.

  • Preventive Restructuring in the Czech Republic

    On 23 September 2023, the Act on Preventive Restructuring came into force, which brought a new legal institute into the Czech legal environment – preventive restructuring, through which companies will be able to resolve their unfavorable economic situation.

    The purpose of preventive restructuring is to resolve the unfavorable economic situation of a company in cases where it has not yet reached insolvency, but it can reasonably be assumed that it would eventually go bankrupt without taking the necessary measures. It is therefore a statutory procedure designed to avert imminent bankruptcy and revitalize a viable company.

    Preventive restructuring does not replace insolvency proceeding but seeks to prevent it and is therefore only permissible if the company is not insolvent. Once a company would be insolvent, the preventive restructuring must be replaced by insolvency proceeding.

    Preventive restructuring is only for certain legal entities, i.e. companies and cooperatives. Financial institutions, financial service providers and other financial entities, as well as all natural persons, including those in business, are not able to use this new institute.

    In order to use preventive restructuring, certain qualifying criteria must be met. These are the condition of good faith, the existence of real financial difficulties and the absence of bankruptcy. In addition to the qualification criteria, the law also introduced disqualification criteria. The key disqualifying criterion is dishonest intent. Other disqualification criteria include the situation where the entrepreneur is in liquidation, has been finally declared bankrupt in the last 5 years or has had a previous preventive restructuring in the last 5 years.

    Preventive restructuring is carried out on a voluntary basis. The company itself, for which the preventive restructuring is planned, draws up a rehabilitation project, after which, following approval by the company’s creditors, a restructuring plan is drawn up on its basis. 

    The creditors of the company to be preventively restructured are divided into groups according to their legal status and economic interest and have a decisive say in the approval of the restructuring plan. At least a three-fourths majority vote in each group of affected parties is required for its adoption and the restructuring plan must be adopted by all groups at the same time.

    The institute of preventive restructuring provides companies with a tool to resolve their adverse economic situation and avoid possible insolvency proceedings. The question remains how widely companies will use this tool, as the costs will be relatively high given the complexity and difficulty of preparation; for smaller companies in economic difficulties, such an expense could even be liquidating. However, this question will only be resolved by future practice.

    By Tomas Jelinek, Senior Associate, and Jan Cermak, Junior Associate, Eversheds Sutherland

  • Schoenherr and CMS Advise on BHS Private Equity Fund Acquisition of Altran

    Schoenherr has advised the BHS Private Equity Fund on participating in the acquisition of Altran alongside BHS’s general partner Versute Investments and Altran managers Petr Havlik, Jaromir Kejval, and Milan Krovina. CMS advised the Capgemini group on the sale. Arrows reportedly advised the managers on the deal.

    Founded in 1993, Altran, now renamed Tiyo, is a provider of research, development, and testing services.

    The BHS Private Equity Fund is a sub-fund of the BHS Fund II – Private Equity, a variable capital investment fund, and focuses on investments in small and medium-sized businesses in the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

    Capgemini is a French multinational informational technology services and consulting company.

    The Schoenherr team included Partner Vladimir Cizek and Attorneys at Law Michal Jendzelovsky, Helena Hangler, Marie Gremillot, Libuse Docekalova, Rudolf Bicek, Petr Koral, Kristyna Zmatlikova, Jan Kupcik, and Sebastian Speta.

    The CMS team included Managing Partner Helen Rodwell, Associate Pavel Kocian, and Lawyer Huyen Vuova.

  • Zbysek Kordac and Anna Bartunkova Make Associate Partner at Weinhold Legal

    Weinhold Legal lawyers Zbysek Kordac and Anna Bartunkova have been appointed as Associate Partners.

    Kordac joined Weinhold Legal in 2006. According to the firm, his primary focus is on arbitral and insolvency proceedings as well as commercial and civil law. 

    Bartunkova specializes in labor law as well as arbitration, litigation, commercial, and civil law. Before joining Weinhold Legal in 2014, she spent over eight years with Holec Zuska & Partners.

    “Zbysek and Anna are outstanding professionals with extensive experience in a number of key areas of legal services that our firm focuses on, particularly in the areas of litigation, corporate, and employment law,” Managing Partner Daniel Weinhold commented. “We look forward to seeing them in their new roles to further develop a wide range of legal services that will benefit our current and future clients.”

  • What Changes Will the Czech Republic’s New Preventive Restructuring Act Bring to Debtors and Creditors?

    After a delay of more than a year, an act on preventive restructuring (the “Act”) implementing the EU directive on preventive restructuring frameworks finally became effective in the Czech Republic on 23 September 2023. The long-awaited Act introduces a brand-new legal tool preventing the insolvency of viable enterprises in temporary financial distress.

    What is preventive restructuring and why use it?

    Today a distressed company may try to achieve an out-of-court arrangement with its creditors requiring the consent of all affected creditors with the terms of the restructuring. If a timely agreement with all affected parties cannot be achieved, the distressed company risks the deterioration of its financial situation or even insolvency, which can only be resolved by means of formal insolvency proceedings.

    The aim of the Act is to enable debtors to restructure effectively at an early stage and to avoid insolvency, preventing the unnecessary liquidation of viable enterprises and restoring them to health. It is a voluntary and flexible process requiring cooperation with creditors, but not necessarily with all of them. This is the situation for which preventive restructuring is primarily intended.

    Who can use it?

    Access to preventive restructuring is limited to corporate debtors (legal entities, not natural persons) that meet the following fundamental conditions:

    1. the company should be in good faith regarding the restructuring, viability and restoration of the business;
    2. the company is not insolvent in the form of illiquidity (platební neschopnost) (cash-flow insolvency) – preventive restructuring should not apply in case of serious insolvency situations, but is aimed at the continuation of the business by restructuring its assets and liabilities and by implementing operational changes; over-indebtedness is not an issue from the perspective of eligibility to use preventive restructuring;
    3. the financial difficulties are so serious that if the proposed restructuring measures are not implemented, the company would become insolvent; this should exclude the preventive restructuring of financially healthy entities attempting to manipulate their creditors or business partners to provide advantages or relief beyond the ordinary course of business;
    4. generally, preventive restructuring is excluded in cases where the business entity has a dishonest intention (nepoctivý záměr) – the Act clarifies this vague term by providing a demonstrative list of these situations.

    Main features

    Since the Act introduces a wide range of new preventive restructuring measures, only some of the most distinctive aspects illustrating the preventive restructuring framework will be mentioned.

    Restructuring with key creditors only

    Compared to insolvency proceedings, preventive restructuring does not have to involve all the existing creditors of the company. The circle of creditors (affected parties) is chosen by the company itself and will likely include the key creditors only – usually the banks and the top business partners. The claims of the unaffected parties will be set aside as unaffected and will be satisfied within the due dates in full.

    Protection for new and interim financing

    The Act provides for special protection of new and interim financing (such as protection against claw-back actions in case of future potential insolvency), which should create a framework for the willingness of creditors, primarily banks, to provide new financing to the distressed company.

    Cross-class cram-down

    Although preventive restructuring is based on the broadest possible consensus between the company and its creditors, when it comes to intended restructuring measures indicated in the restructuring plan, it is possible, subject to certain conditions, to “impose” the agreement on dissenting creditor(s).

    Limited court involvement

    During preventive restructuring the court will be involved only partially and subject to specific conditions, e.g. in case a general and individual moratorium is declared or if a restructuring plan not approved by all affected creditors is confirmed.

    Limited publicity

    Preventive restructuring is primarily based on informal and private negotiations between the company and affected creditors. To avoid stigmatising the company, the publicity of the whole process is significantly limited compared to insolvency proceedings. Not all the documents will be published in the restructuring register, but only the most important ones, such as declaration of general moratorium or confirmation of restructuring plan.

    Protection of the distressed company

    The Act also gives the company powerful tools in the form of general or individual moratorium (general/individual stay) providing protection against enforcement actions of secured and unsecured creditors and against discontinuation of key contracts. Both types of moratoria can have significant implications for creditors’ rights and in extreme scenarios may theoretically last up to 12 months.

    Weaknesses

    Despite the exceptionally long legislative process, it is already clear that the preventive restructuring framework in the Czech Republic has not avoided some shortcomings. Compared to reorganisation under the Insolvency Act, there is no tax exemption for profits from debt relief, i.e. the income of the debtor generated by debt relief based on the restructuring plan may constitute taxable income. Also, no online restructuring register has been launched yet and all information will need to be checked on the official boards of the respective regional courts.

    Conclusion

    It remains to be seen what changes preventive restructuring will really bring to Czech insolvency law and market players, and whether and how it will be used in practice. Clearly it will create opportunities for debtors and creditors, but also challenges, especially for creditors affected by the restructuring plan and potential financing parties.

    By Natalie Rosova, Attorney at Law, Schoenherr

  • PRK Partners Advises RWE on Sale of Gas Storage Business in Czech Republic

    PRK Partners has advised RWE on the sale of its subsidiary RWE Gas Storage CZ to the CEPS state-owned electric power transmission system operator. EY Law reportedly advised CEPS.

    RWE is a German power producer.

    According to PRK Partners, “Gas Storage CZ is the largest operator of gas storage facilities in the Czech Republic with six underground gas storage facilities with a total operating volume of more than 2.7 billion cubic meters.”

    The PRK Partners team included Partners Martin Kriz, Radan Kubr, and Roman Pecenka, Associate Partner Jan Varecha, and Senior Associates Milan Sivy, Marian Baus, and Katerina Hajkova.

  • Havel & Partners Advises Ceska Sporitelna Seed Starter on Sale of Stake in Investown Technologies

    Havel & Partners has advised Investown Technologies shareholder Ceska Sporitelna Seed Starter on the sale of a stake in the company to Finbus.

    Ceska Sporitelna Seed Starter is a fund dedicated to venture capital investments.

    Investown Technologies operates an online crowdfunding application for real estate projects.

    Finbus is a real estate development company.

    The Havel & Partners team included Partner Jaroslav Baier, Senior Associate Josef Bouchal, and Junior Associate Pavel Gapeev.

    Havel & Partners did not respond to our inquiry on the matter.

  • Glatzova & Co Helps SNP Invest Obtain CNB Permission to Operate Investment Fund

    Glatzova & Co has advised SNP Invest on obtaining permission from the Czech National Bank to operate as a self-managed investment fund of qualified investors.

    SNP Invest was founded by Petar Zacek and Jiri Fil.

    The Glatzova & Co team included Partner Libor Nemec, Senior Attorney at Law Andrea Pisvejcova, and Associate Attorney at Law Marko Thiemmel.

  • Amendment to the Labour Code finally approved with effect from 1 October 2023

    As the amendment is effective as early as 1 October 2023, we provide below an overview of the main changes, indicating the necessary or recommended steps for employers to be taken:

    1) Home Office    

    Overview of Main Changes

    • HO will only be possible based on a written agreement with 15 days’ notice (can be modified or excluded by agreement). 
    • 3 methods of compensation for costs of HO: (i) proven actual costs, (ii) flat rate per hour as per relevant regulation, or (iii) agreement that no costs are to be compensated. 
    • Protected employees (pregnant women, employees caring for children under 9 or dependents) can request HO – discretionary, only right to written explanation.  

    How to Prepare? 

    • Enter into a written HO agreement within 1 month.
    • Select and implement a method of compensation for costs of HO.

    Review and modify existing internal HO agreements, guidelines, and regulations. 

    2) Agreement on Performance of Work (APW)/Agreement on Working Activity (AWA)

    Overview of Main Changes

    • Obligation to schedule employees’ working hours and to inform the employees of the schedule at least 3 days before the shift, unless a shorter period has been agreed. 
    • Entitlement to basic scheme allowances (for night shifts, weekend shifts, holidays shifts, difficult working environment).
    • Application of the Labour Code regarding working hours and mandatory rest periods.
    • Entitlement to all work-related impediments as for employment, but newly granted impediments are unpaid. 
    • Holiday entitlement (from 1.1.2024) – same calculation as for employees working on the basis of an employment agreement (notional 20h work week, the employee must work minimum of 4 weeks and 80 hours). 

    Option to apply for transfer to the legal regime of an employment agreement – after working a minimum of 180 days in the last 12 months – discretionary, only right to written explanation.

    How to Prepare?

    • Revise the existing templates of the APWs/AWAs
    • Conclude amendments to the existing APWs/AWAs

    Review and modify existing internal regulations, documentation, and processes.

    3) Extension of the Information Obligation

    Overview of Main Changes

    • Expanding the scope of information to be provided during onboarding. 
    • Special information obligation when sending employee for work abroad.
    • Reduction of the time limit to 7 days from the start of the employment.
    • Existing employees only need to be “newly” re-informed if they request it. 
    • Possibility to inform electronically if it is possible to save and print the information.  

    Information also for APW/AWA to an equivalent extent. 

    How to Prepare? 

    • Revise and complete the template information. 
    • Prepare new information for APW/AWA. 

    Review and modify existing internal regulations, documentation, and processes. 

    4) Electronic Conclusion of Agreements

    Overview of Main Changes

    • It will be possible to conclude the employment agreement, APW/AWA and amendments thereto, including termination agreements, electronically, typically by e-mail, even with a simple electronic signature.  
    • Under the condition that, once concluded, the document will be delivered to the employee’s private e-mail address, which the employee has notified in writing. 

    The employee can withdraw within 7 days (except for termination agreements and if the employee has already started working). 

    How to Prepare?

    • Decide on the electronic conclusion of agreements.
    • Obtain private email addresses from employees. 

    Review and modify existing internal regulations, documentation, and processes.

    5) Delivery of Important HR Documents

    Overview of Main Changes

    • Significant narrowing of the list of documents that must be delivered in person pursuant to the Labour Code – in particular termination documents (with the exception of agreements) and salary statement remain.
    • It is up to the employer to choose the main method of delivery (in person at the workplace/anywhere, by e-mail or by databox). Only by classic mail delivery, the impossibility of personal delivery at the workplace is required. 
    • It will be possible to deliver using e-mail with a recognised e-signature, subject to the employee’s special consent to his/her private e-mail address (fiction of delivery after 15 days). 
    • It will also be possible to deliver to the employee’s databox without his/her consent unless he/she denies deliveries of private messages.

    Significant simplification also for e-delivery to a designated employer’s e-mail address (a simple signature is sufficient, 15day fiction of delivery).

    How to Prepare?

    • Decide on the use of e-delivery.
    • Prepare wording and obtain qualified employees’ consents.
    • Obtain databox information.
    • Determine and inform employees about email address for delivery to the employer.

    Review and modify existing regulations, documentation, and processes.

    6) Other Important Changes

    Overview of Main Changes

    • Increase in limits for agreed overtime for employees in the healthcare sector.
    • Modified request for parental leave (in writing, at least 30 days in advance, incl. duration)
    • “Shortened” continuous rest week (min. 24 hours, but plus 11 hours)

    Shifted burden of proof in certain employee disputes.

    How to Prepare? 

    • Review and modify existing internal regulations, documentation, and processes.  
    • New agreements for additional overtime for employees in the healthcare sector.  

    By Radek Matous, Partner, Eversheds Sutherland