Overview

Intercreditor agreements between secured creditors are intended to limit the potential for litigation and result in predictable commercial outcomes with respect to recoveries from collateral in enforcement actions and bankruptcies. Despite the extensive drafting efforts of sophisticated counsel to eliminate ambiguities in these agreements, the interpretation of intercreditor agreements has been the subject of substantial bankruptcy litigation.

In a pair of recent decisions,1two federal courts in the Southern District of New York have broadly interpreted Section 316(b) of the Trust Indenture Act (“TIA”)2to limit the ability of parties to strip guarantees from dissenti