1. The CMS Law-Now article “Arbitration agreement does not prevent winding up petition” updated the position in England & Wales following the Privy Council decision in Sian Participation Corporation (In Liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd [2024] UKPC 16 (“Sian”).
Trademark licensees that file for bankruptcy protection face uncertainty concerning their ability to continue using trademarks that are crucial to their businesses. Some of this stems from an unsettled issue in the courts as to whether a licensee can assume a trademark license without the licensor’s consent. In In re Trump Entertainment Resorts, Inc., 2015 BL 44152 (Bankr. D. Del. Feb. 20, 2015), a Delaware bankruptcy court reaffirmed that the ongoing controversy surrounding the “actual” versus “hypothetical” test for assumption of a trademark license has not abated.
Hong Kong Court records available publicly today show that a Petition was presented last Friday to wind up O.W. Bunker China Ltd (a Hong Kong company). The records indicate that the Winding-up Petition was presented by the company itself rather than a creditor. This is consistent with the steps taken by other companies within the OW Bunker group to seek Court protection.
We are receiving numerous enquiries regarding the fallout from the bankruptcy of OW Bunker A/S and certain associated companies. At this stage, some companies are in formal bankruptcy proceedings, with the Court protection that usually entails, but others are not.
A debtor's decision to assume or reject an executory contract is typically given deferential treatment by bankruptcy courts under a "business judgment" standard. Certain types of nondebtor parties to such contracts, however, have been afforded special protections. For example, in 1988, Congress added section 365(n) to the Bankruptcy Code, granting some intellectual property licensees the right to continued use of licensed property, notwithstanding a debtor's rejection of the underlying license agreement.