El tribunal ha dictado un auto que se detiene sobre determinadas prácticas que se han producido en las subastas extrajudiciales de algunos procesos de liquidación. Concretamente, descarta la posibilidad de cobrar una comisión cuando el adjudicatario en la subasta es el propio acreedor con privilegio especial.

The appeal court has issued a decision which constitutes a reminder to be careful in relation to practices that have been occurring in certain out-of-court auctions within liquidation proceedings. Particularly, it rejects the possibility that a commission fee is collected when the winning bidder is the secured creditor whose security interest levies the asset sold.

As discussed in previousposts, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (the “Act”) was signed into law on December 27, 2020, largely to address the harsh economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

With courts and government agencies around the world enacting emergency measures in response to the Covid-19 pandemic – ranging from complete shutdowns to delays and limitations – advancing the ball in dispute resolution is more challenging than ever. Because fraud investigations and complex asset recovery matters are typically managed by litigation counsel and often follow litigated claims, clients have a tendency to see the effort through a litigation lens.

In a recent decision by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Weisfelner, v. Fund 1, et al. (In re Lyondell Chem. Co.), 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 159 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.