Key points
- Automatic stays on proceedings are imposed by Article 20 of the UNCITRAL Model Law (and mirrored in s.130(2) IA 1986)
- The case reinforces the principle that automatic stays are designed to avoid the unnecessary expenditure of assets otherwise available for distribution amongst creditors
The facts
The Facts
A owned two properties, one of which had been divided into two separately rateable properties for council tax purposes. R presented a bankruptcy petition against A based on a purported debt of £14,097.59 owed by A in respect of unpaid council tax for which it had obtained liability orders from the Magistrates Court.
Key points
Rights under s23, s24 and s31 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (the “Act”) can only be pursued by the spouses themselves. Consequently, any ongoing action brought pursuant to those sections of the Act does not vest in the trustee in bankruptcy on appointment.
The facts
Key points
- Without notice applications for recognition orders carry the obligation of full and frank disclosure to the English court in relation to the effect such orders may have on third parties.
- Failure to provide full and frank disclosure may have cost consequences.
The facts
Key Point
The court adjourned a bankruptcy hearing on the basis that a Spanish court sanctioned liquidation plan for a group of companies in which the debtor had an interest might release value for creditors.
The Facts
When can a bank be at risk of unknowingly receiving a fraudulent transfer? How much information does a bank need to have before it is on “inquiry notice”? A recent decision from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals highlights the risks that a bank takes when it ignores red flags and fails to investigate. This decision should be required reading for all lenders since, in the matter before the Seventh Circuit, the banks’ failure to investigate their borrower’s questionable activity caused the banks to lose their security and have their secured loans reduced to unsecured claims.
Did Trump win again? Yes, but this time it was not “The Donald” but was instead the casino operator Trump Entertainment Resorts, Inc.
Did Trump win again? Yes, but this time it was not “The Donald” but was instead the casino-operator Trump Entertainment Resorts, Inc. (“Trump Entertainment”).
When can a bank be at risk of unknowingly receiving a fraudulent transfer? How much information does a bank need to have before it is on “inquiry notice”? A recent decision from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals highlights the risks that a bank takes when it ignores red flags and fails to investigate.
In re Sentinel Management Group – The Decision
Two days before Christmas, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that is likely to have a dramatic impact in the highly-contested Caesars Entertainment bankruptcy case. The decision may also give a green light to other debtors seeking to enjoin lawsuits brought against non-debtor affiliates.