In the March/April 2013 edition of the Business Restructuring Review, we reported on an opinion by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York concluding that a chapter 15 debtor’s sale of claims against Bernard Madoff’s defunct brokerage company was not subject to review as an asset sale under section 363(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.

In Schoenmann v. Bank of the West (In re Tenderloin Health), 849 F.3d 1231 (9th Cir. 2017), a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently addressed as a matter of apparent first impression whether or not a bankruptcy court can consider hypothetical preference actions in analyzing whether a creditor-transferee in preference litigation received more than it would have received in a hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation, as required by section 547(b)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

De Hoge Raad heeft geoordeeld dat het adviesrecht van de ondernemingsraad in beginsel wel van toepassing is in geval van faillissement. Hierbij formuleert de Hoge Raad drie richtlijnen:

In de Employment Update van april jl. informeerden wij u al over het feit dat de Advocaat-Generaal van het Hof van Justitie van de Europese Unie ("HvJ") in zijn conclusie in de zaak Estro/Smallsteps het HvJ heeft geadviseerd, dat de Richtlijn Overgang van Onderneming gewoon van toepassing dient te zijn op zogenaamde pre-pack faillissementen. Een pre-pack faillissement betekent - in het kort - dat een doorstart volgend op een faillissement al vóór de faillietverklaring in stilte wordt voorbereid met de hulp van een "beoogd curator".

Among the required elements of a claim to avoid a preferential transfer under section 547(b) of the Bankruptcy Code is that, if the creditor-transferee were permitted to retain a pre-bankruptcy payment, it would end up being paid more than it would receive in a hypothetical liquidation of the debtor under chapter 7, assuming the transfer did not occur. This requirement and a defense to preference liability predicated on it—the "Kiwi defense"—were the subject of a ruling handed down by a Delaware bankruptcy court. In Pirinate Consulting Grp., LLC v. C. R. Meyer & Sons Co.

In Beem v. Ferguson (In re Ferguson), 2017 BL 101650 (11th Cir. Mar. 30, 2017), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit addressed the distinction between constitutional mootness (a jurisdictional issue that precludes court review of an appeal) and equitable mootness (which allows a court to exercise its discretion to refuse to hear an appeal under certain circumstances). The Eleventh Circuit ruled that an appeal from an order confirming a chapter 11 plan was not constitutionally moot because an "actual case or controversy" existed.

In Weisfelner v. Blavatnik(In re Lyondell Chemical Company), 2017 BL 131876 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Apr. 21, 2017), the bankruptcy court presiding over the chapter 11 case of Lyondell Chemical Company ("Lyondell") handed down a long-anticipated opinion in the protracted litigation concerning the failed 2007 merger of Lyondell with Basell AF S.C.A. ("Basell"), a Netherlands-based petrochemical company.

De pre-pack procedure is mogelijk een kort leven beschoren. Bij deze procedure wordt al vóór het uitspreken van het faillissement een doorstart voorbereid door de aanwijzing van een "beoogd curator". De wet die deze wettelijk moet verankeren in het Nederlandse insolventierecht in 2016 is aangenomen door de Tweede Kamer, maar moet nog van kracht worden.

New EU Regulation on Cross-Border Preservation of Accounts Potentially Useful Tool to Secure Assets in EU Member States

In a highly anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on March 22, 2017, in Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., No. 15-649, 2017 BL 89680 (U.S. Mar. 22, 2017), that, without the consent of affected creditors, bankruptcy courts may not approve "structured dismissals" providing for distributions which "deviate from the basic priority rules that apply under the primary mechanisms the [Bankruptcy] Code establishes for final distributions of estate value in business bankruptcies."