Fulltext Search
Supreme Court upholds limited bankruptcy court jurisdiction over defendants in fraudulent transfer actions; leaves an open door to constitutional challenges when parties face a trial in bankruptcy court

On June 9, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, a case that tested the extent of the jurisdiction of bankruptcy court judges to decide fraudulent transfer and certain other claims against non-debtors. Ropes & Gray LLP represented the petitioner in obtaining certiorari and in the Supreme Court proceedings.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Ropes & Gray LLP, Standard of review, Supreme Court of the United States, United States bankruptcy court
First major PPSA decision - perfection is key!

Dispute is one of priority, not ownership.

The first judgment regarding a major Personal Property Securities Act ("PPSA") priority dispute between a bank with a perfected "General Security Agreement" and an equipment owner with an unperfected "PPS Lease" has been handed down.

The decision in Richard Albarran and Blair Alexander Pleash as receivers and managers of Maiden Civil (P&E) Pty Ltd & Ors v Queensland Excavation Services Pty Ltd & Ors  highlights three key issues for the insolvency industry:

Australia, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Baker McKenzie
Time extensions for voidable transaction proceedings, and the commissioner for taxation

The importance of notifications to potential defendants and directors of the insolvent company

The decision in Re Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd (in liq) [2013] NSWSC 786 highlights two key issues for insolvency practitioners:

Australia, New South Wales, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Baker McKenzie, Liquidation
WaMu court allows equity committee to pursue “equitable disallowance” of noteholder claims based on allegations of insider trading

On September 13, 2011, Judge Mary F. Walrath of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware granted standing for an equity committee in In re Washington Mutual, Inc. (“WaMu”) to seek “equitable disallowance” of claims held by noteholders that had traded claims after engaging in negotiations with WaMu over the terms of a global restructuring.

USA, Delaware, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, White Collar Crime, Ropes & Gray LLP, Confidentiality, Shareholder, Debtor, Security (finance), Fiduciary, Hedge funds, Insider trading, Non-disclosure agreement, Supreme Court of the United States, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for District of Delaware