El Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea acaba de pronunciarse sobre tres de los más importantes extremos interpretativos del régimen de garantías financieras contenido en la Directiva 47/2002.

Made-in-the-USA retailer American Apparel, LLC and its affiliated entities (“Debtors”) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Monday, Nov. 14th for the second time in just over a year, colloquially known as the “Chapter 22”. The filing comes just about a year after the fashion retailer previously filed for bankruptcy, when the company exited court protection in early 2016 but quickly encountered trouble again.

In the recent decision of Unsecured Creditors Comm. of Sparrer Sausage Co., Inc. v. Jason’s Foods, 826 F.3d 388 (7th Cir. 2016), the Seventh Circuit overturned the bankruptcy court’s application of the “bucketing” method to assess an ordinary-course defense to preference liability, concluding that range of invoice payment dates chosen as the baseline was arbitrarily narrow.

In a lengthy opinion published November 7, 2016, Judge Sontchi of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court provided a thorough analysis of the interaction between the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) and the Bankruptcy Code. Judge Sontchi’s opinion is available here (the “Opinion”). The Opinion was issued in the Chapter 15 case In re Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited, Case No. 13-12159.

On November 8, 2016, Judge Kevin Gross of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court issued an opinion (the “Opinion”) that affects nine different bankruptcy cases. The Opinion was issued in response to the request of Honeywell and Ford for access to asbestos claimants’ Rule 2019 exhibits. A copy of the Opinion is available here.

La Audiencia Nacional, en una interesante sentencia, ha matizado el criterio que desde la Administración ha venido manteniéndose en muchos casos en virtud del cual la presencia de una segunda finalidad en las operaciones de reestructuración empresarial, añadida a la de perseguir una auténtica reorganización de la entidad, conllevaría, partiendo del análisis conjunto de la operación, la exclusión de la posibilidad de aplicar el régimen especial previsto a efectos del impuesto sobre sociedades para las citadas operaciones.

Como regla general, los créditos de los administradores de hecho contra la sociedad concursada que ellos administran (o han administrado) de facto serán clasificados como subordinados en los términos previstos en los artículos 92.5.º y 93.2.2.º de la Ley Concursal. Durante los dos años siguientes a la entrada en vigor de la Ley 17/2014, ha regido un régimen coyuntural que ha permitido que los créditos derivados de la aportación de «nuevos ingresos de tesorería» (fresh money) en el marco de acuerdos de refinanciación típicos escaparan a la postergación concursal.

On October 27, 2016, Chief Judge Brendan L. Shannon of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court issued an opinion overruling objections to the claims of Seegrid’s former CEO. A copy of the Opinion is available here.

In the decision of Motors Liquidation Co. Avoidance Action Trust v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (In re Motors Liquidation Co.), 552 B.R. 253 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2016), the SDNY bankruptcy court held that prepetition interest payments on a term loan did not qualify as “settlement payments” under Section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code.

In my May 26th post, I raised several questions that unsecured creditors in any Chapter 11 case should know the answers to and take action where appropriate. One of those questions is “Am I entitled to priority payment?” This is also important to answer in a Chapter 7 case.