Chapter 11 plans commonly protect a debtor’s key stakeholders that participate in the chapter 11 process from claims arising in connection with the bankruptcy case. The Office of the United States Trustee (the “US Trustee”), the branch of the Department of Justice tasked with monitoring bankruptcy cases, has recently taken aim at limiting the use and scope of these “exculpation” provisions in large restructuring cases across the country.

Background and Standards

On April 19, 2021, the United States Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari from the Second Circuit’s decision in In re Tribune Company Fraudulent Conveyance Litigation (“Tribune II”),[1] leaving intact the Second Circuit’s decision upholding the safe harbor defense to avoidance actions und

“The discharge of claims in bankruptcy applies with no less force to claims that are meritorious, sympathetic, or diligently pursued. Though the result may chafe one’s innate sense of fairness, not all unfairness represents a violation of due process.”

On March 19, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a unanimous decision[1] affirming that the mutuality requirement of section 553(a) of the Bankruptcy Code must be strictly construed and, therefore, that triangular setoffs are not permissible in bankruptcy.

The Government is attempting to shackle transfers to connected parties by way of pre-pack Administration.

The new draft 'Administration (Restrictions on Disposal etc. to Connected Persons) Regulations 2021', published 24 February (Draft Regulations), are designed to further increase transparency for the wider stakeholder body in connection with pre-packaged Administration business and asset sales to management, sponsors and other connected parties.

How the night time industries could make it through the last months of lockdown

In his address to the nation on Monday afternoon, the Prime Minister set out the government’s roadmap for cautiously easing lockdown restrictions in England. He shared the latest data on infection rates, hospitalisations and deaths, as well as early data showing the efficacy of vaccines.

The roadmap for leaving lockdown, which was published on gov.uk on Monday, seeks to balance health, economic and social factors with the very latest epidemiological data and advice.

• The hospitality industry has been fighting back against the Government's lockdown measures due to the lack of financial support, but there is absolutely no doubt that the worst is yet to come as having weathered lockdown 2.0, Government policy now looks set to deny many operators the ability to trade properly in the run up to Christmas, with hard hit businesses set to miss out on circa £7.8bn of trade.
• The majority of the temporary measures introduced by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 may have been extended, but directors remain mindful of their statutory duti

Almost 20 years ago the Government decided to abolish Crown Preference bringing it into step with other western jurisdictions such as Germany and Australia. It was considered at the time "inequitable" to elevate the public purse above ordinary unsecured creditors for whom the impact was potentially far greater.

Astonishingly, in the midst of a global pandemic and a looming "No Deal" Brexit, absent a dramatic last minute "U-turn" by the Government (let's face it, it wouldn’t be the first !), Crown Preference will return with effect from December 1st 2020.

The devastating effect of the global COVID-19 pandemic has been felt across the entire leisure and hospitality sector, but nowhere has felt the pain quite as acutely as the UK's night-time economy which, without extended Government support, may struggle to survive. With crowds the new enemy, many venues will remain closed for the foreseeable future and possibly for good.

In a decision arising out of Tribune’s 2008 bankruptcy, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently issued a decision affirming confirmation of the media conglomerate’s chapter 11 plan over objections raised by senior noteholders who contended that the plan violated their rights under the Bankruptcy Code by not according them the full benefit of their prepetition subordination agreements with other creditors.