Argentina

The long-running dispute continues between Argentina, which defaulted on its sovereign debt for the second time in July 2014, and holdout bondholders from two previous debt restructurings.

The long-running dispute over the payment of Argentina’s sovereign debt, on which the South American nation defaulted for the second time in July 2014, continues to be particularly active.

Location:

To promote the finality and binding effect of confirmed chapter 11 plans, the Bankruptcy Code categorically prohibits any modification of a confirmed plan after it has been "substantially consummated." Stakeholders, however, sometimes attempt to skirt this prohibition by characterizing proposed changes to a substantially consummated chapter 11 plan as some other form of relief, such as modification of the confirmation order or a plan document, or reconsideration of the allowed amount of a claim. The U.S.

Location:

Despite the absence of any explicit directive in the Bankruptcy Code, it is well understood that a debtor must file a chapter 11 petition in good faith. The bankruptcy court can dismiss a bad faith filing "for cause," which has commonly been found to exist in cases where the debtor seeks chapter 11 protection as a tactic to gain an advantage in pending litigation. A ruling recently handed down by the U.S.

Location:

On January 14, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court held in City of Chicago v. Fulton, 592 U.S. __ (2021), that a creditor in possession of a debtor's property does not violate the automatic stay, specifically section 362(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code, by retaining the property after the filing of a bankruptcy petition. The Court's decision provides important guidance to bankruptcy courts, practitioners, and parties on the scope of the automatic stay's requirements.

Location:

The EMEA Determinations Committee's recent bankruptcy determination involving Selecta CDS provides additional insight on the types of chapter 15 filings that are likely to trigger Credit Events.

Location:

Bankruptcy protection under Section 365 does not give brand owners/debtor-licensors the unilateral right to rescind trademark licensing agreements.

Location: