Fulltext Search

There is an inherent tension between the goals of bankruptcy law and the state law doctrine of constructive trust. A central tenet of bankruptcy policy is that similarly situated creditors should be treated equally: because an insolvent business or individual will not be able to pay all creditors in full, a proper bankruptcy system must provide as equitable a distribution to each of them as possible. Constructive trust law, on the other hand, works to the advantage of a single creditor – which always means the detriment of the others when everyone is competing for limited funds.

Yesterday, the Special Inspector General for the Trouble Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP) released a report criticizing the Treasury Department’s role in the accelerated closure of hundreds of GM and Chrysler dealerships.

On Tuesday, the Bank of Spain released details regarding the status of the restructuring of the Spanish savings bank sector, in what it called “the biggest overhaul of the Spanish banking sector in recent history.” The Bank also provided details regarding funding for bank restructurings supplied by the Fund for the Orderly Restructuring of the Banking Sector (FROB),

Yesterday, the U.K. Treasury announced that it had published a report setting out detailed proposals for the effective management and resolution of failed investment banks.

Today, the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law held a hearing to discuss the role of bankruptcy and antitrust law in financial regulatory reform, particularly with respect to institutions that may be regarded as “too big to fail,” as highlighted during the financial crisis.

Testifying before the Subcommittee were the following witnesses:

Panel I