Keywords: Supply chain, Financial distress,
insolvency, Operational Support
In many industries, the supply chain includes multiple companies
providing production material. At the same time, it is not unusual
for a supplier within the supply chain to encounter financial
distress or even declare insolvency. This can have a significant
impact on the company if its business depends on a distressed
If the company relying on deliveries cannot replace the
distressed supplier with an alternative one that is able to supply
the company in a timely manner with products of the same quality
and quantity, this can cause interruption of the company's
ongoing production and longer delivery lead times. This is likely
to be the case when the relevant products are not commodities but
rather customized products. Especially in just-in-time industries,
such as the automotive industry, supply interruptions can
dramatically affect business operations within a very short
Our White Paper summarizes efficient approaches to reduce these
risks if the agreement is properly tailored in advance.
Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider
comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the
"Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are:
Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both
limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer
Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership
incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the
Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales
number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France;
Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated
entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian
law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer
Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the
Mayer Brown Practices in their respective
This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments
on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not
a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not
intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific
legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
After global media organisations published the leaked Panama Papers from law firm Mossack Fonseca revealing how corporates and some of the world's wealthy and powerful used offshore companies to hide their assets . . .
In two cases this year, the Court of Appeal has held that a term in a contract that no variation shall be binding unless it complies with certain formalities does not necessarily prevent an informal variation.
Some company directors fail to properly grasp the distinction between the company as a separate legal entity and their own personal and financial matters.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).