Among the many financial innovations that came out of the COVID era, non-pro rata uptier transactions as a liability management exercise (“LMEs”) are among the more controversial. While lawsuits challenging non-pro rata uptier transactions are making their way through the courts, two important decisions were recently issued by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the New York Appellate Division.

On average, the Supreme Court hears a single bankruptcy case each term. But during the October 2022 term, the Supreme Court issued a remarkable four decisions in bankruptcy cases. These decisions, which are summarized below, address appellate issues relating to sale orders, the discharge of claims obtained by fraud, and sovereign immunity issues in two different contexts.

I. Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code is not a jurisdictional provision that precludes appellate review of asset sale orders.

Businesses in a wide range of industries may now be forced to consider bankruptcy given the unprecedented economic challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This advisory is designed to provide a high-level view of issues to be considered by human resources when considering filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Please note that this advisory focuses specifically on a Chapter 11 bankruptcy (pursuant to which a business will be reorganized) rather than Chapter 7 bankruptcy (pursuant to which a business will be liquidated).

La Resolución de la Dirección General de los Registros y del Notariado (RDGRN) de 19 de diciembre de 2018 (BOE 28 de enero) se pronuncia de nuevo sobre la extinción registral de sociedades sin patrimonio. En esta ocasión se admite la inscripción de una escritura de disolución y liquidación de una sociedad de responsabilidad limitada en la que el liquidador declaró que la sociedad carecía de activos y de acreedores, de conformidad con el balance aprobado unánimemente por los socios.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court announced that it will review the scope of Bankruptcy Code section 546(e)’s safe harbor provision. Section 546(e) protects from avoidance those transfers that are made “by or to (or for the benefit of)” a financial institution, except where there is actual fraud. The safe harbor is intended to ensure the stability of the securities market in the event of corporate restructurings.

In a recent decision (“Energy Future Holdings”) poised to have wide-reaching implications, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decisions of the Bankruptcy and the District Courts to hold that a debtor cannot use a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing to escape liability for a “make-whole” premium if express contractual language requires such payment when the borrower makes an optional redemption prior to a date certain.

1. Introducción

1. Introducción

El apartado siete del artículo 21 del Proyecto de Ley de apoyo a los emprendedores y su internacionalización añade un nuevo Título X a la Ley Concursal integrado por doce artículos (231 a 242) que regula el expediente de Acuerdo extrajudicial de pagos.

I. Planteamiento

Es sabido que en la práctica judicial concursalista española se ha extendido la técnica de dictar Autos de simultánea declaración y conclusión del concurso con extinción de la persona jurídica concursada y baja registral por la presumible insuficiencia del activo para hacer frente a los créditos previsibles contra la masa (denominado concurso express).