Two recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions demonstrate that the corporate attribution doctrine is not a one-size-fits-all approach.
Court approval of a sale process in receivership or Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) proposal proceedings is generally a procedural order and objectors do not have an appeal as of right; they must seek leave and meet a high test in order obtain it. However, in Peakhill Capital Inc. v.
Bed Bath & Beyond, the home goods retailer, has filed bankruptcy under Chapter 11 and plans to conduct liquidation sales and close all of its brick-and-mortar stores by June 30, as reported by The New York Times. The retailer points to an inability to adjust to the growth of online shopping as a reason for its downfall.
On February 13, 2023, Ultra Petroleum Corporation (“Ultra”) filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the US Supreme Court seeking review of the Fifth Circuit’s October 2022 ruling that, in solvent-debtor cases, debtors must pay unsecured creditors applicable contractual make-whole premiums and postpetition interest at contractual default rates in order for such unsecured creditors to be considered unimpaired.
In a January 2023 opinion,1 the Southern District of New York Bankruptcy Court overseeing the bankruptcy case of Latin American airline Avianca and certain of its affiliates sanctioned over 150 of the airline’s Brazilian and Columbian creditors who had filed proofs of claim in the bankruptcy case finding t
In a decision likely to have significant impact on certain types of bankruptcy filings going forward, this morning, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the dismissal of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case filed by Johnson & Johnson affiliate LTL Management LLC.
On October 19th, the Wall Street Journal reported that the electric vehicle startup Mullen Automotive Inc., gained court approval to buy an Indiana manufacturing plant and assets from Electric Last Mile Solutions for $92 million. Such deal, which boosted Mullen’s share prices by 64%, includes Electric Last Mile Solutions’ manufacturing plant in Mishawaka, Indiana and its inventory and intellectual property.
在各类跨境投资的项目中,投资人最担心的问题莫过于被投企业的财务状况出现困境,影响其持续经营能力和偿债能力并最终演变为债务危机,或者集团的持股结构、治理结构不够透明,各种交叉持股盘根错节。在重组过程中,投资者可能会帮助公司梳理、调整各种投资主体架构,而企业为了解除投资者顾虑,有时也会主动进行投资主体架构的重组和优化,包括把多余的主体和结构层级精简掉。
在跨境投资的架构中,往往涉及到多层持股架构,开曼公司、BVI公司以及香港公司都是常见的持股主体。如果我们在重组中需要把这些主体精简注销,需要走什么样的程序,复杂不复杂?在本文中,我们将与大家分享开曼豁免有限公司的清盘和解散,并且后续文章中陆续与大家分享其他法域主体的清算和注销。
系列导语
在各类跨境投资的项目中,投资人最担心的问题莫过于被投企业的财务状况出现困境,进而影响其持续经营能力和偿债能力并最终演变为债务危机。这些投资人可能是企业公募或私募债券的持有人、享有抵押品的银团放贷机构、各类融资架构中的夹层债权人,或是享受回购权或强制出售权的权益投资人。
跨境投资项目下的债务重组,往往会涉及多法域下的复杂法律问题、救济方式和司法程序。特别是在典型的境外持股架构下,当开曼公司作为境外母公司出现债务危机时,如何通过BVI及香港子公司逐级下沉债权人的风控或增信机制,如何衔接和落地相关境内外救济措施,如何最终帮助债权人控制或取得境内子公司的资产或其提供的担保品或抵押品,这些问题的妥善解决是债务重组成功的关键。这要求参与跨境债务重组项目的专业执行团队具有跨市场和跨国界的运作能力、多法域的法律和司法实操经验、高效的项目管理能力以及深刻的风险认知和风险反制筹划能力。由于各个法域下的质权之设立、优先顺位和有效性对于债权人和质押权人来说至关重要,加强对主要离岸法域对质押行为的程序性规定和质权有效性的判定认识能有效地防范潜在的交易风险。
In its June 6, 2022 opinion in Siegel v. Fitzgerald, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split and invalidated a 2017 statute that increased U.S. Trustee fees in 48 states—but not Alabama or North Carolina—as unconstitutional under the uniformity requirement of the Constitution’s Bankruptcy Clause. See Siegel v. Fitzgerald, 596 U.S. ___ (2022).
U.S. Trustee Fees, a History