“[L]ack of good faith in a SIPA [Securities Investor Protection Act] liquidation applies an inquiry notice, not willful blindness, standard, and that a SIPA trustee does not bear the burden of pleading the transferee’s lack of good faith,” held the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on Aug. 30, 2021. In re Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, 2021 WL 3854761, 91 (2d Cir. Aug. 30, 2021) (“Madoff”).

The author examines a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that involved whether a contract was, or was not, an executory contract.

“[B]ankruptcy inevitably creates harsh results for some players,” explained the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on May 21, 2021, when it denied a film producer’s claim for contractual cure payments in In re Weinstein Company Holdings, LLC. 1

"`Staggering' legal fees in Boy Scouts Bankruptcy Case." So read the title of an article in The New York Times on May 11, 2021. According to the reporter, a "lawyer negotiating a resolution to the multi-billion dollar bankruptcy filed by the Boy Scouts of America billed $267,435 in a single month. Another charged $1,725 for each hour of work. New lawyers fresh out of law school have been billing at an hourly rate of more than $600." The bankruptcy judge presiding over the case has called the fee totals "staggering," said the reporter.

“[B]ankruptcy inevitably creates harsh results for some players,” explained the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on May 21, 2021, when it denied a film producer’s claim for contractual cure payments. In re Weinstein Company Holdings, LLC, 2021 WL 2023058, *9 (3d Cir. May 21, 2021).

Expected for almost two months, the law that partially and temporarily modifies the insolvency legislation has been adopted on 21 March 2021 at last.

This is nearly two months after the general moratorium on bankruptcies, that was in force since 28 October 2020, expired.

1. Why this legislative intervention was necessary

The main purpose of this measure is to adapt the existing restructuring toolbox to the needs of Belgian companies facing major financial difficulties due to the corona crisis.

On l’attendait depuis bientôt deux mois, voire plus : le 21 mars 2021, une loi réformant partiellement et temporairement le droit de l’insolvabilité a été votée.

Cette loi intervient presque deux mois après la fin du moratoire général sur les faillites en place depuis le 28 octobre 2020 et qui prenait fin le 31 janvier dernier.

1. Pourquoi cette intervention législative était nécessaire

Hervorming van de insolventiewetgeving

Meer dan twee maanden hebben we er op moeten wachten, maar op 21 maart 2021 kwam eindelijk de goedkeuring van de wet die de insolventiewetgeving gedeeltelijk en tijdelijk hervormt.

Dit was bijna twee maanden nadat het algemene moratorium op faillissementen dat sinds 28 oktober 2020 van kracht is, afliep.

1. Waarom deze wetgevende tussenkomst noodzakelijk was

Réforme de droit de l'insolvabilité

On l’attendait depuis bientôt deux mois, voire plus : le 21 mars 2021, une loi réformant partiellement et temporairement le droit de l’insolvabilité a été votée.

Cette loi intervient presque deux mois après la fin du moratoire général sur les faillites en place depuis le 28 octobre 2020 et qui prenait fin le 31 janvier dernier.

1. Pourquoi cette intervention législative était nécessaire

The debtors' legal malpractice claim was "not property of their bankruptcy estate," held a split Ninth Circuit on June 30, 2020. In re Glaser, 816 Fed. Appx. 103, 104 (9th Cir. June 30, 2020) (2-1). But the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota one week later affirmed a bankruptcy court judgment that "the [debtor's] estate was the proper owner" of such a claim. In re Bruess, 2020 WL3642324, 1 (D. Minn. July 6, 2020).

A secured lender's "mere retention of property [after a pre-bankruptcy repossession] does not violate" the automatic stay provision [362(a) (3)] of the Bankruptcy Code, held a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 14, 2021. City of Chicago v. Fulton, 2021 WL 125106, 4 ( Jan. 14, 2021). Reversing the Seventh Circuit's affirmance of a bankruptcy court judgment holding a secured lender in contempt for violating the automatic stay, the Court resolved "a split" in the Circuits. Id. at 2. The Second, Eighth and Ninth Circuits had agreed with the Seventh Circuit.