In a departure from prior precedent in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), a recent opinion by Judge Michael E. Wiles in In re Cortlandt Liquidating LLC,[1] effectively lowered the Bankruptcy Code section 502(b)(6) cap on rejection damages that a commercial real estate landlord may claim, by holding that the cap should be calculated using the “Time Approach,” rather than the “Rent Approach.”
Calculation of Lease Rejection Damages
The March 2023 banking crisis has been an unexpected “stress test” for dealing with liquidity issues.
When state regulators closed Silicon Valley Bank this past Friday, many startups understandably faced severe liquidity issues triggered by the sudden and unexpected loss of access to their deposits.
On January 4, 2023, Judge Glenn of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York issued a much-awaited decision in the Celsius Network LLC (along with its affiliated debtors, “Celsius” or the “Debtors”) chapter 11 cases relating to the ownership of crypto assets deposited by customers in the Celsius “Earn” rewards program accounts.
Over the span of two weeks in July 2022, two of the largest retail-facing cryptocurrency platforms, Celsius and Voyager, filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
In New York, it is a standard practice to name all tenants residing in a building when foreclosing upon the property.
为创新经济发展模式、扩大对外开放力度,国家设立大湾区并着力将其打造为充满活力的世界级城市群和内地与港澳深度合作示范区。从定位不难看出,实行充分的市场经济和法治经济,为全国经济发展提供新的引擎和全新的模式,无疑是粤港澳大湾区的重要使命。要完成这一神圣使命,离不开破产重整制度。通过破产重整,挽救那些一时陷入财务困境和经营困境的企业,从而为湾区经济健康发展保驾护航。SX公司通过破产重整涅槃重生,就是破产重整制度保驾护航的典型案例。
一、企业初探:破产重整的机遇与挑战
1、SX公司基本情况
SX公司成立于1981年,于1994年在深交所上市,总股本约35000万股,其中流通股18000万股,限售流通股17000万股。
SX公司控股或参股四家实业公司,分别为科技公司、实业公司、饲料公司和西部公司。
2、SX公司重整受理情况
因不能清偿到期债务,经债权人饲料公司申请,深圳市中级人民法院(下称深圳中院)于2009年11月10日裁定SX公司进入重整程序,并指定北京市金杜(深圳)律师事务所担任管理人。
This week’s TGIF takes a look at the recent case of Mills Oakley (a partnership) v Asset HQ Australia Pty Ltd [2019] VSC 98, where the Supreme Court of Victoria found the statutory presumption of insolvency did not arise as there had not been effective service of a statutory demand due to a typographical error in the postal address.
What happened?
This week’s TGIF examines a decision of the Victorian Supreme Court which found that several proofs had been wrongly admitted or rejected, and had correct decisions been made, the company would not have been put into liquidation.
BACKGROUND
This week’s TGIF considers Re Broens Pty Limited (in liq) [2018] NSWSC 1747, in which a liquidator was held to be justified in making distributions to creditors in spite of several claims by employees for long service leave entitlements.
What happened?
On 19 December 2016, voluntary administrators were appointed to Broens Pty Limited (the Company). The Company supplied machinery & services to manufacturers in aerospace, rail, defence and mining industries.
This week’s TGIF considers the recent case of Vanguard v Modena [2018] FCA 1461, where the Court ordered a non-party director to pay indemnity costs due to his conduct in opposing winding-up proceedings against his company.
Background
Vanguard served a statutory demand on Modena on 27 September 2017 seeking payment of outstanding “commitment fees” totalling $138,000 which Modena was obliged, but had failed, to repay.