Recent insolvencies remind us that, when a seller of goods is unpaid, the question of possession leaps to the foreground. There is little value in a claim against an insolvent buyer for damages or for the price.

As most global markets attempt a return to normal (or a new form of normal) business, it is hard to imagine a sector or an industry that isn’t already reeling from the effects of the past three months. Getting back on your feet is hard enough in the current environment, without having to worry about further setbacks impacting your business. But how would you react if your key supplier called tomorrow to let you know that they were insolvent and unable to provide you with goods or services?

For some time we have been following with interest the case of Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (in liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd as it progresses through the courts. Why? Because this concerns an important question which comes up time and time again: are the regimes of construction adjudication and insolvency set off compatible?

My latest contribution to BloombergLaw was the following piece on some of the unique issues and challenges presented for self-insured employers and their plan administrators when those employers seek (or contemplate) bankruptcy relief. In brief:

Part II: Customer Considerations: Risk Mitigation = Smarter Sales

In the coming months, very few companies, whether public or private, will be able to avoid including statements in their quarterly reports or financials that attribute single or double digit percentage declines in revenue to doubtful accounts and insolvencies of major customers caused by the pandemic. For many, if not most, that disclosure will continue beyond Q4 of 2020 and through 2021.

For those following the fallout from the Fyre Festival, the drama continues. Last week, model and influencer Kendall Jenner settled a bankruptcy lawsuit for $90,000 relating to her promotion of the Festival.

The UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy introduced the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill (the Bill)¹ into Parliament on 20 May 2020. The Bill is due to proceed through Parliament on an accelerated timetable and is expected to come into force without changes towards the end of June 2020.

Guiding a business as a chief executive officer is difficult in the best of times. In the midst of a pandemic, uncertainty is rampant. However, in that uncertainty often times there is opportunity.

Sometimes Chapter 11 is a viable and appropriate strategy for an organization to right size its balance sheet and adjust its long term contracts. CEO's must adapt to changing circumstances. Careful consideration of the impacts - both positive and negative - of Chapter 11 can be critical to guiding an organization and in some cases, it may allow a business to thrive.

This brief article considers the currently active restructuring markets in Asia and provides examples of where insolvency procedures from outside of Asia come to the rescue or, depending on your side of the table, torment, those trying to implement an orderly restructuring.

Introduction

The United States Supreme Court opted not to hear a dispute regarding broad third party releases contained in a plan of reorganization which releases were held by lower courts to be binding on nonconsenting creditors. In the Third Circuit bankruptcy case of Millenium Lab Holdings II LLC, the bankruptcy court approved a plan containing such releases, a decision upheld on appeal by the District Court in Delaware and thereafter by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. The Third Circuit's decision was largely based on its interpretation of the Supreme Court's decision in Stern v.