Since online auctioneer Paddle 8 filed for bankruptcy protection in March, creditors of the company have begun filing their notices of claim in the bankruptcy case. One thing on which the creditors all seem to agree is that the current assets of Paddle 8 will be insufficient to cover its debts by a considerable margin. Paddle 8’s lenders and commercial landlord are by far the largest creditors, and standing out from the crowd will be difficult.

Early last week the online auctioneer Paddle 8 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the Southern District of New York, on the heels of a recent lawsuit demanding payment for works of art sold at a charitable auction last November.

Following the judgments in recent years on attribution to a company of its directors' knowledge in Bilta (UK) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Nazir [2015] UKSC 23 and UBS AG (London Branch) and another v Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig [2017] EWCA Civ 1567, the UK Supreme Court has once more returned to this issue in Singularis Holdings Ltd (in Official Liquidation) (a Company Incorporated in The Cayman Islands) v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd [2019] UKSC 50, in a case where a bank (Daiwa) was held liable for breaching its Quincecare duty of care to its customer,

BEIS has just published the Government's response to its March 2018 consultation on "Insolvency and Corporate Governance" reforms (for our March alert on this, click

English courts recognise that shareholders hold a separate legal personality from the body corporate they own a stake in and will only go behind the corporate veil in limited circumstances. In the recent case of Onur Air Taşimacilik AŞ v Goldtrail Travel Ltd (In Liquidation) 1 , the Court of Appeal considered whether the financial means of the appellant’s wealthy controlling shareholder could be taken into account when making an order that the appellant had to make a substantial payment into court as a condition of being able to pursue its appeal.

Summary

Judge Rhodes has approved the plan of adjustment for Detroit to emerge from bankruptcy.  More analysis to come, but most critically for our purposes it affirms the Grand Bargain and the security of the collection of the Detroit Institute of Arts.  We’ll post the full opinion when it’s published, but notably, Nathan Bomey at the Detroit Free Press reported from the courtroom that Judge Rhodes praised the decision not to sell the DIA collection: “Maintaining the art at the DIA is critical to maintaining the feasibility of the city’s plan of adjustment and the city’s future.

Throughout the Detroit bankruptcy and the attendant speculation about what role, if any, the collection at the Detroit Institute of Arts that is owned by the city should play, a parallel parlor game has been to try to guess what Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr’s endgame and motivation really was.  He has dropped hints a

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has answered a lingering  question about the interpretation of Massachusetts’s fine art consignment  law, G.L. c. 104A, § 2. Laying to rest any doubts about whether a written  agreement is required at the time of delivery to create a consignment  under the statute, the SJC has interpreted the 2006 amendments to the  law for the first time and clarified the roles of everyone involved.

After Syncora Capital settled its objections to the Detroit bankruptcy plan of adjustment, it looked like the battle over the Detroit Institute of Arts collection would subside.  Not so fast, it turns out.  A major contest looms next week with a remaining creditor, Financial Guaranty Insurance Corporation, over the valuation of the collection.  Just to recap, the creditors (including both Syncora and FGIC) submitted a valuation of the entire DIA collection that put the value between $8 billion, performed by Victor Wiener Associates, while DIA and the city advanced an appraisa