German law · English information
Failure to submit a required insolvency application, or submitting it too late, can have civil and criminal consequences. The actual onset of insolvency is decisive.
Maximum periods, not waiting periods
Section 15a InsO requires an application without culpable delay, no later than three weeks after illiquidity or six weeks after over-indebtedness. The longer period does not permit further delay if illiquidity also occurs. Restructuring efforts must be realistic and documented.
Who has a duty to act?
The rule applies particularly to the management bodies of legal entities and certain partnerships. A management vacancy can create additional obligations for shareholders or supervisory board members. Associations and foundations have special rules. The position of a de facto director can also matter.
Coordinate the response
Criminal allegations, liability for payments after insolvency and losses suffered by individual creditors must be assessed separately. Preserve accounting records, emails, financing commitments, resolutions and liquidity information without alteration. Summonses, searches and deadlines require prompt coordination of the defence; substantive statements should follow legal assessment and, where appropriate, access to the case file.
Related information
Procedures overview · Creditor rights · Corporate insolvency
Official German Insolvency Code · Official StaRUG
Practical implementation
Reconstructing insolvency grounds and the relevant dates
Assessment of a late filing requires a timeline of due liabilities, available funds, enforcement and financing developments. Statutory maximum periods are not a general grace period. Later receipts do not automatically establish the position at an earlier date. Where several directors served, their responsibilities, information and monitoring arrangements require individual examination. The analysis should distinguish facts known at the time from information obtained only later.
Coordinating criminal and civil responses
Criminal allegations, administrator claims and individual creditor claims do not have identical requirements. Responses should nevertheless use a consistent, verified factual record. Before a detailed statement is made, the allegations, relevant period and file need examination. Accounting data, emails, funding commitments and advice records should be preserved. A later reconstruction must remain identifiable as such; altering original records is not an acceptable way to correct a historical evidential problem.
Four practical examples
The following scenarios are illustrative examples, not reports of client matters. The outcome depends on the facts and applicable rules.
Example 1: Reliance on external bookkeeping
Accounts are maintained externally and warnings arrive late. The review concerns the information available to management and the controls in place. Outsourcing bookkeeping does not remove the director's responsibility to monitor the company's financial position.
Example 2: A new director takes office
A new director discovers substantial arrears. She needs a prompt, reliable assessment and review of filing duties. Appointment does not automatically create a fresh full grace period independent of the company's existing condition.
Example 3: Rescue funding is delayed
An investor repeatedly postpones payment. Management must revisit the forecast when funds cannot be obtained in time. Relevant considerations include the facts then known, realistic remedies and timely filing.
Example 4: The administrator alleges an earlier onset
A claim alleges that insolvency grounds existed months before filing. The response should examine maturity dates, deferrals, accounts and contrary evidence. Historic turnover alone does not answer the allegation, nor does a single unpaid invoice prove every necessary element.
Discuss your situation
Tell us your role, the parties involved and any deadlines. We will check conflicts, agree the scope of the work and explain the fees before accepting instructions.