Two recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions demonstrate that the corporate attribution doctrine is not a one-size-fits-all approach.

Court approval of a sale process in receivership or Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) proposal proceedings is generally a procedural order and objectors do not have an appeal as of right; they must seek leave and meet a high test in order obtain it. However, in Peakhill Capital Inc. v.

There will be no further deferral of the entry into force of Legislative Decree No. 14 of 12 January 2019 (the new Italian Bankruptcy Law, also known as Code of the Business Crisis and Insolvency, "CCII"), which will fully replace the current Italian Bankruptcy Law.

There will be no further deferral of the entry into force of Legislative Decree No. 14 of 12 January 2019 (the new Italian Bankruptcy Law, also known as Code of the Business Crisis and Insolvency, "CCII"), which will fully replace the current Italian Bankruptcy Law.

On October 21, 2021, the Italian Parliament has definitively approved the conversion into law of Law Decree no. 118/2021, introducing "urgent measures concerning company crises and business reorganisation, as well as further urgent measures on justice" (the "Decree").

On October 21, 2021, the Italian Parliament has definitively approved the conversion into law of Law Decree no. 118/2021, introducing "urgent measures concerning company crises and business reorganisation, as well as further urgent measures on justice" (the "Decree").

Italian bankruptcy law: the new provisions brought by Law Decree No. 118/2021 and the so called "negotiated settlement procedure" aimed at solving business crises.

In order to support businesses to face with the economic and financial crisis caused by SARS-Cov-2 emergency, the Law Decree No. 118 of 24 August 2021 has introduced "urgent measures concerning company crises and business reorganisation, as well as further urgent measures on justice" (the "Law Decree No. 118/2021").

In Shameeka Ien v. TransCare Corp., et al. (In re TransCareCorp.), Case No. 16-10407, Adv. P. No. 16-01033 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. May 7, 2020) [D.I. 157], the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York recently refused to dismiss WARN Act claims against Patriarch Partners, LLC, private equity firm (“PE Firm“), and its owner, Lynn Tilton (“PE Owner“), resulting from the staggered chapter 7 bankruptcies of several portfolio companies, TransCare Corporation and its affiliates (collectively, the “Debtors“).

Joining three other bankruptcy courts, Judge Thuma of the District of New Mexico recently held that the rules issued by the Small Business Administration (“SBA“) that restrict bankrupt entities from participating in the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP“) violated the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, H.R. 748, P.L. 115-136 (the “CARES Act”), as well as section 525(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.

The Southern District of New York recently reminded us in In re Firestar Diamond, Inc., et al., Case No. 18-10509 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. April 22, 2019) (SHL) [Dkt. No. 1482] that equitable principles in bankruptcy often do not match those outside of bankruptcy. Indeed, bankruptcy decisions often place emphasis on equality of treatment amongst all creditors and are less concerned with inequities to individual creditors.

Introduction

In Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., f/b/o Jerome Guyant, IRA v. Highland Construction Management Services, L.P. et al., Nos. 18-2450-52 (4th Cir. March 17, 2020), the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld that a borrower’s indirect economic interests in a limited liability company (LLC) were not assigned to a lender under a conveyance in a security agreement assigning mere membership interests, pursuant to Virginia state law.

Facts