Highlights
In May 2021, a landmark co-operation mechanism was implemented between Hong Kong and Mainland China in cross-border insolvency matters.
Liquidators from Hong Kong can now apply to the courts in three Mainland "pilot cities" (ie Shanghai, Shenzhen and Xiamen) for recognition and assistance, provided that:
Should a claim for appraisal rights brought by a former shareholder of a Chapter 11 debtor be subordinated under Section 510(b) of the Bankruptcy Code? According to the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, the answer is yes. See In re: RTI Holding Co., LLC, No. 20-12456, 2021 WL 3409802 (Bankr. D. Del. Aug. 4, 2021).
Background
Trillions of dollars of securities are issued on the strength of bankruptcy remoteness and special purpose entities (“SPVs”) intended to be bankruptcy remote. These transactions generally involve hundreds of millions of dollars and investors’ expectations that the SPVs will not be dragged into a potential bankruptcy filing of their non-SPV affiliates.
In a recent opinion, the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland dealt with a conflict between the strong presumption in favor of enforcing arbitration agreements and the Bankruptcy Code’s emphasis on centralization of claims. Based on an analysis of the two statutory schemes and their underlying policies and concerns, the Court decided to lift the automatic stay to allow the prepetition arbitration proceeding to go forward with respect to non-core claims.
Background
The Hong Kong government will introduce a long-awaited statutory corporate rescue procedure (CRP) in 2021, bringing the regime more in line with international practice in jurisdictions such as the UK and the USA.
The current lack of a CRP in Hong Kong means that there are limited options available to distressed companies and the lack of a moratorium on creditor enforcement jeopardises legitimate restructuring efforts. The Companies (Corporate Rescue) Bill is timely given the difficulties brought by the current economic downturn, itself exacerbated by the impact of COVID-19.
The Hong Kong government will introduce a long-awaited statutory corporate rescue procedure (CRP) in 2021, bringing the regime more in line with international practice in jurisdictions such as the UK and the USA.
The current lack of a CRP in Hong Kong means that there are limited options available to distressed companies and the lack of a moratorium on creditor enforcement jeopardises legitimate restructuring efforts. The Companies (Corporate Rescue) Bill is timely given the difficulties brought by the current economic downturn, itself exacerbated by the impact of COVID-19.
The application of sovereign immunity principles in bankruptcy cases has vexed the courts for decades. The U.S. Supreme Court’s opinions on the matter have not helped much. Although they have addressed the issue in specific contexts, they have not established clear guidelines that the lower courts may apply more generally. The Third Circuit took a crack at clarifying this muddy but important area of the law in the case of Venoco LLC (with its affiliated debtors, the “Debtors”).
Background
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas recently clarified the administrative expense standard applicable to indenture trustees by holding that they can recover fees and expenses as administrative expenses only when they make a “substantial contribution.” This standard requires a greater showing than “benefit to the estate,” which is the general administrative expense standard. In re Sanchez Energy Corp., No. 19-34508 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. May 3, 2021).
Background
Turns out, it depends on who you ask. Judge Bernstein said no. Recently, Judge Glenn said yes, but only for causes of action that resemble actual fraudulent transfers. It is unusual for the bankruptcy judges in Manhattan to disagree with each other, so let’s take a look at the issue.
Background