Fulltext Search
German Insolvency Law - The Insolvency Administrator’s Right to Choose or Reject Performance

Within German contract law, the principle of being bound by a contract (pacta sunt servanda), i.e. the obligation to fulfill agreements, applies. In case of the insolvency of one of the contractual parties, however, exceptions are made. Upon the opening of the insolvency proceedings, the principle of being bound by a contract is modified. 

Germany, Insolvency & Restructuring, Mayer Brown
Deutsches Insolvenzrecht - Das Wahlrecht des Insolvenzverwalters

Im deutschen Vertragsrecht gilt das Prinzip der Vertragstreue (pacta sunt servanda), welches die Verpflichtung zur Erfüllung von Verträgen zum Gegenstand hat. Hiervon werden im Falle der Insolvenz einer Vertragspartei Ausnahmen gemacht. Mit Eröffnung des Insolvenzverfahrens wird das Prinzip der Vertragstreue modifiziert. 

Germany, Insolvency & Restructuring, Mayer Brown
The Ninth Circuit Vacates Bankruptcy Court’s Designation Order, Holding That Purchasing a Subset of Available Claims to Block a Plan, Absent An Ulterior Motive, Does Not Constitute Bad Faith

Summary

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Ninth Circuit
Connecticut Bankruptcy Court Holds That Trademark Licensee Does Not Automatically Lose the Right to Use Trademarks When Debtor-Licensor Rejects License, Siding with Seventh Circuit in Circuit Split

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut recently examined a question at the heart of an existing circuit split regarding the consequences of trademark license rejection in bankruptcy: can a trademark licensee retain the use of a licensed trademark post-rejection? In re SIMA International, Inc., 2018 WL 2293705 (Bankr. D. Conn. May 17, 2018).

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Trademarks, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Supreme Court Holds That Presence of Financial Conduits Does Not Trigger “Safe Harbor” Protection for Securities-Related Transfers Under Section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code

On February 27, 2018, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding the proper application of the safe harbor set forth in section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code, a provision that prohibits the avoidance of a transfer if the transfer was made in connection with a securities contract and made by or to (or for the benefit of) certain qualified entities, including a financial institution.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Ninth Circuit Holds That Joint Plan Covering Multiple Debtors Must Be Approved by Only One Impaired Class Per Plan, Not One Impaired Class Per Debtor

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that section 1129(a)(10) of the Bankruptcy Code – a provision which, in effect, prohibits confirmation of a plan unless the plan has been accepted by at least one impaired class of claims – applies on “per plan” rather than a “per debtor” basis, even when the plan at issue covers multiple debtors. In re Transwest Resort Properties, Inc., 2018 WL 615431 (9th Cir. Jan. 25, 2018). The Court is the first circuit court to address the issue.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Ninth Circuit
Delaware Bankruptcy Court Affirms Its Constitutional Authority to Approve Nonconsensual Releases

Some six years after the United States Supreme Court decided Stern v. Marshall, courts continue to grapple with the decision’s meaning and how much it curtails the exercise of bankruptcy court jurisdiction.[1] The U.S.

USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Supreme Court Bars Use of Nonconsensual Priority-Violating Structured Dismissals

On March 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court held that bankruptcy courts cannot approve a “structured dismissal”—a dismissal with special conditions or that does something other than restoring the “prepetition financial status quo”—providing for distributions that deviate from the Bankruptcy Code’s priority scheme absent the consent of affected creditors. Czyzewski v.Jevic Holding Corp., No. 15-649, 580 U.S. ___ (2017), 2017 WL 1066259, at *3 (Mar. 22, 2017).

USA, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Supreme Court of the United States, United States bankruptcy court
Bundestag beschließt Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechtssicherheit bei Anfechtungen nach der Insolvenzordnung und nach dem Anfechtungsgesetz

Nachdem das Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz bereits im März 2015 einen Referentenentwurf hinsichtlich eines Gesetzes zur Verbesserung der Rechtssicherheit bei Anfechtungen nach der Insolvenzordnung und nach dem Anfechtungsgesetz vorgelegt hatte, hat der Bundestag mehr als ein Jahr nach der ersten Lesung den Gesetzesentwurf am 16. Februar 2017 doch noch verabschiedet. Nachdem nun auch der Bundesrat am 10.

Germany, Insolvency & Restructuring, Mayer Brown, Bundestag
The Second Circuit Articulates Standard For Determining Scope of Free and Clear Sale Provision and Highlights Procedural Due Process Concerns That Bear on Enforcement

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently articulated a standard to determine what claims may be barred against a purchaser of assets "free and clear" of claims pursuant to section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code and highlighted procedural due process concerns with respect to enforcement.1  The decision arose out of litigation regarding certain defects, including the well-known "ignition switch defect," affecting certain GM vehicles.  GM's successor (which acquired GM's assets in a section 363 sale in 2009) asserted that a "free and clear" provisi

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, General Motors, Second Circuit, United States bankruptcy court