Fulltext Search
ASHINC or Swim Case Study: Lessons for Private Equity Sponsors on Risks Relating to Distressed Portfolio Companies (Part I: Continuous Contractual Breach Under a Loan Agreement)

In an opinion that mostly flew under the radar in 2021, Judge Christopher Sontchi from the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Court”) found investment firm Yucaipa American Alliance Fund I, L.P. and Yucaipa American Alliance (Parallel) Fund I, L.P.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Private equity, Fourth Amendment
ASHINC or Swim Case Study: Lessons for Private Equity Sponsors on Distressed Portfolio Company Risks (Part I: Sponsor Breach of Company Loan Agreement)

In an opinion that mostly flew under the radar in 2021, Judge Christopher Sontchi from the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Court”) found a private equity sponsor (the “Sponsor”)1 liable (and, in some cases, not liable) under various contractual and tort theories in connection with actions the Sponsor took or did not take in its failed efforts to stave off a potential bankruptcy filing of its portfolio company, Allied Systems Holdings, Inc., now known as ASHINC Corporation (“Allied” or the “Company

USA, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Private equity, Fourth Amendment
Arbitrate? You Can’t Make Me! Rejection Trumps Arbitration, Says Texas Bankruptcy Court

Overview

USA, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Federal Arbitration Act 1926 (USA)
The Third Circuit Lets the Katz Out of the Bag: No Sovereign Immunity for California in the Post-Confirmation Venoco Dispute

The Executive Summary provided a short version of the facts. The next few paragraphs provide a longer version, or you can skip to the next section.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, European Commission, Supreme Court of the United States
Latest Update in the Wells Fargo, Willis and Virgin Australia Case - The Appeal to the High Court of Australia

On 4 November 2021, the High Court of Australia heard the arguments put forward by Wells Fargo Trust Company, National Association and Willis Lease Finance Corporation, together Wells Fargo, and the administrators (the Administrators) of the Virgin Australia Airlines group, which entered into administration on 20 April 2020. The dispute primarily concerned who should pay for the redelivery of four aircraft engines capable of being used on B737s (the Engines) to the lease redelivery location in Florida.

Australia, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown, High Court of Australia
Prepetition Claim or Postpetition Claim? The Timing of a Claim When A Debtor’s Prepetition Wrongful Actions Continue Postpetition

Executive Summary

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Warning to directors as UAE court imposes personal liability for corporate debts

In what could prove to be a landmark judgment, a Dubai court ruled earlier this month that the directors of a company in bankruptcy should be personally liable for the company’s debts, to the sum of almost AED 450,000,000 (around US$ 122,000,000).

Article 144 of Federal Law No.9 of 2016 (the “Bankruptcy Law”) allows a court to order directors to pay a bankrupt company’s debts where:

United Arab Emirates, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown
Bankruptcy No Sanctuary Against Government Enforcement Actions: NRA’s Chapter 11 Case Dismissed as Bad Faith Filing

Executive Summary

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Corporate governance
A Reminder That a 9019 Motion Is Not a Slam Dunk: Bankruptcy Court Denies 9019 Motion After Determining That Approving Certain Findings Required By Settlement Would Amount to Inappropriate Advisory Opinion

Introduction

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Bankruptcy
The Aftermath of a Complicated Breakup: Third Circuit Holds Stalking Horse Bidder in Terminated Transaction May Assert Potential Administrative Expense Claim Notwithstanding Disallowance of Its Termination Fee

Executive Summary

On March 15, 2021, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Third Circuit”) held that a stalking horse bidder may assert an administrative expense claim pursuant to section 503(b)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code for costs incurred in attempting to close on an unsuccessful transaction, even when the stalking horse bidder is not entitled to a breakup or termination fee.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Due diligence