It goes without saying that the past few years have been quite unique.

An issue arising with increasing frequency in connection with Cayman Islands domiciled investment funds is the circumstances in which an investor in a solvent fund can bring an informal wind down initiated by management of the fund to an end and have the board replaced by a liquidator appointed by the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (“the Court”).

Restrictions on a borrower’s ability to prepay secured debt obligations are a common feature of modern bond indentures and credit agreements. Lenders frequently employ “no-call” provisions to prevent borrowers from refinancing or retiring outstanding debt prior to maturity. Loan documents also may permit prepayment at the borrower’s option, but conditioned on the payment of a “makewhole premium” (often referred to as a “prepayment penalty”).

THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE: (citation: George Klidonas; "Automatic Stay in Chapter 15: Global Stay Applicable Only in Chapter 11 Cases" XXIX ABI Journal 9; 48-49, 86; November 2010) - George Klidonas

I have been involved in hundreds of insolvency cases over the course of a career that has spanned more than 25 years. The apparent causes of the company’s difficulties could usually be distilled down to one or more problems drawn from a predictable list of factors. These included over expansion (“if we build it, they will come”), high interest rates, shifts in commodity prices, loss of a major contract or customer, fraud and others that were less obvious.

Reproduced with permission of the publisher from National Insolvency Review, Vol. 27, No. 5, October 2010.

Introduction The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit's recent opinion in In re Visteon Corp(1) is a significant victory for retirees whose rights could be impaired in a Chapter 11 case, and further signals the court's inclination towards strict statutory construction.

In a much-awaited decision, New York’s highest court on October 21, 2010 gave a broad scope to the in pari delicto doctrine that is often used as a defense when a company’s outside professionals are sued on behalf of the company for their roles in connection with management-led wrongdoing at the company. In a 4-3 ruling in two consolidated cases, Kirschner v. KPMG LLP and Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (Nos. 151 & 152, Oct. 21, 2010), the New York Court of Appeals— addressing questions certified to it by the U.S.

On September 21, 2010, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted BNY Corporate Trustee Services Limited leave to appeal a decision of the Bankruptcy Court in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy case.1 The Bankruptcy Court held that a key provision of certain transaction documents constituted an unenforceable ipso facto clause. The District Court granted leave to appeal the Bankruptcy Court decision even though it was interlocutory.

Commercial sellers need to be particularly careful when purporting to sell property with vacant possession. In a recent case, Area Estates Limited v Weir (2010), Area Estates tried to sell a site to Weir, telling Weir that Area’s former tenant had surrendered its lease, so that Area could sell with vacant possession. What had actually happened is that Area’s tenant had become bankrupt, and so the lease actually became vested in the tenant’s Trustee in Bankruptcy.