The New York Court of Appeals decision on April 5, in the Midland Insurance Company liquidation (In re Liquidation of Midland Insurance Company1) is an important affirmation of policyholder rights. In this decision, New York’s highest court held that a policyholder is entitled to a claim and policy-specific choice of law analysis in the liquidation process, rejecting the Midland liquidator’s effort to make a blanket application of New York law to Midland’s 38,000 policyholders.
The Financial Markets and Insolvency (Settlement Finality and Financial Collateral Arrangements) (Amendment) Regulations 2010 came into force on 6 April 2011.
According to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, a lack of bad faith is no longer a defense to court sanctions for failure to produce documents in a timely manner. That court, in In re A&M Florida Properties II, recently awarded sanctions against both a party and its counsel for the counsel’s failure to become familiar with the client’s email and data-retention policies and systems— despite the absence of any bad faith or willful delay.1
Article L 611-4 to L 611-15 of the French Commerce Code.
Act n° 2005-845 of 26 July 2005, as completed and amended, has created a new out-of-court settlement process known under French law as “Conciliation,” replacing the former amicable settlement or “règlement amiable.”
- In re TOUSA, Inc., 408 B.R. 913 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2009). Prepetition lenders could not assert third-party claims against the debtors for breach of contract based on loan document representation that debtor borrowers, on a consolidated basis, would be solvent after the financing transaction because such claims did not depend on the outcome of the fraudulent transfer claims of the creditors, which asserted that individual debtor subsidiaries were insolvent.
- In re Metaldyne Corp., 409 B.R. 671 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2009).
After more than a decade of rising real estate values, the tide has turned against commercial and development real estate, prompting major builders and developers to commence Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. As a result of the enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) in 2005, many Chapter 11 cases that revolve around real estate will fall within the Bankruptcy Code’s definition of single asset real estate (SARE) cases and are thus subject to special provisions in the Bankruptcy Code.1 As a result, it is now time to think about SARE.
Introduction
As part of what appears to be a global trend, the amount of litigation in Belgium is increasing rapidly. Litigation advice is fast becoming one of the most in-demand services in legal practice, along with advice on restructuring and employment. Due to the challenging economic and financial conditions, companies are now tending to commence debt collection proceedings as soon as their debtors fail to honour their debts, and are pre-emptively restructuring their businesses in order to avoid unnecessary costs which might eventually lead to bankruptcy.
With the current economic crisis significantly affecting global business, certain procedural remedies can be particularly useful in order to deal with unpaid debts.
The most common of these procedural remedies in Spain is the so-called 'proceso monitorio', which consists of a special payment procedure used for the recovery of specific monetary debts which:
Due to the economic downturn there has been a rapid growth in debt claims and bankruptcy cases in the Finnish courts. Compared to 2008, almost 40% more bankruptcy proceedings and twice as many debt claims have been started this year.