The U.S. Supreme Court held today in Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC that a trademark licensee may retain certain rights under a trademark licensing agreement even if the licensor enters bankruptcy and rejects the licensing agreement at issue. Relying on the language of section 365(g) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Supreme Court emphasized that a debtor’s rejection of an executory contract has the “same effect as a breach of that contract outside bankruptcy” and that rejection “cannot rescind rights that the contract previously granted.”

In a recent decision arising out of the Republic Airways bankruptcy, Judge Sean Lane of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York held that the liquidated damages provisions of certain aircraft leases were improper penalties and, thus, “unenforceable as against public policy” under Article 2A the New York Uniform Commercial Code. In re Republic Airways Holdings Inc., 2019 WL 630336 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2019).

On February 8, 2019, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, affirmed a Bankruptcy Court order enjoining a claimant from pursuing claims against a debtor’s non-debtor affiliates based upon third-party release and injunction provisions included in the debtor’s confirmed chapter 11 plan. In re CJ Holding Co., 2019 WL 497728 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 8, 2019).

Llamo la atención sobre las dos cuestiones enunciadas, que tienen una indudable relevancia práctica en relación con los recursos extraordinarios:

1) La Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo 61/2019 de 31 enero (RJ 2019\227) aborda cuál debe ser la correcta interpretación del artículo 167.1 de la Ley Concursal, que contempla los supuestos en los que «no procederá la formación de la sección de calificación del concurso» cuando en el mismo haya sido aprobado judicialmente un convenio: si se establece en él, «para todos los acreedores o para los de una o varias clases, entendiendo igualmente por tales las establecidas en el artículo 94.2, una quita inferior a un tercio del importe de sus créditos o una espera inferior a tres años, salvo que res

 Se examina, en concreto, el supuesto de que se acuerde el régimen de suspensión de facultades y la administración concursal decide no hacer operativa en la primera instancia la sustitución prevista en la ley.

1. Los hechos analizados por la STS 570/2018, de 15 de octubre (RJ 2018/4613) y el problema planteado

Los hechos relevantes son los siguientes:

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently issued a 2–1 decision affirming the ruling of the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, which reconsidered its prior approval of a $275 million termination fee in connection with a proposed merger. In re Energy Future Holdings Corp., No. 18-1109, 2018 WL 4354741, at *14 (3d Cir. Sept. 13, 2018).

On June 20, 2018, Judge Kevin J. Carey of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware sustained an objection to a proof of claim filed by a postpetition debt purchaser premised on anti-assignment clauses contained in transferred promissory notes. In re Woodbridge Group of Companies, LLC, et al., No. 17-12560, at *14 (jointly administered) (Bankr. D. Del. Jun. 20, 2018).

Summary

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).