In In reLehman Brothers Inc., two creditors recently made an unsuccessful attempt to infuse Section 510(b) of the Bankruptcy Code with ambiguity and avoid the subordination of their claims. In re Lehman Brothers, Inc., 2014 WL 288571 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.
TheLehman Brothers bankruptcy court has determined that the contractually specified methodology for conducting the liquidation of a swap agreement is protected by the safe harbor provisions of the bankruptcy, even if the selected methodology would be more favorable to the non-defaulting counterparty than the liquidation methodology that would apply absent the bankruptcy.See Michigan State Housing Dev. Auth. v. Lehman Bros. Deriv. Prods. Inc. (In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.), No. 08-13555, ---B.R.
On June 25, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”) issued a memorandum decision in the Lehman Brothers SIPA proceeding1 holding that claims asserted by certain repurchase agreement (“repo”) counterparties (the “Representative Claimants”) did not qualify for treatment as customer claims under SIPA.
In Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc. v. Ballyrock ABS CDO 2007-1 Limited (In re Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.), Adv. P. No. 09-01032 (JMP) (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. May 12, 2011) [hereinafter “Ballyrock”], the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York held that a contractual provision that subordinates the priority of a termination payment owing under a credit default swap (CDS) to a debtor in bankruptcy, and which caps the amount of the termination payment, may be an unenforceable ipso facto clause under section 541(c)(1)(B).
Administrators will note with concern the decision of the East London Employment Tribunal in Spencer v Lehman Brothers (in administration) and Others, which suggests that administrators can be held to be personally liable for the discrimination of employees of the business in administration.
Yesterday, the United Kingdom’s Commercial Secretary to the Treasury launched a consultation on a new special-resolution regime, Special administration regime for investment firms, to strengthen the government’s ability to handle future insolvencies of failing investment banks to minimize cost and disruption of the overall national financial system.
Yesterday, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LBHI) and the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of LBHI (the Committee) filed a complaint against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (JPMorgan) in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.
On April 20, the House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing to discuss public policy issues raised by last month’s report of court-appointed bankruptcy examiner for Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (Lehman Brothers), Mr. Anton R. Valukas. The Committee heard testimony from the following witnesses:
Panel One:
Yesterday, the bankrupt estate of Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (Lehman) sued Barclays Capital, Inc.