While the CIS nations have recently provided a multitude of sizeable restructuring cases, the region’s dominant force, Russia, has stood up reasonably well to lengthy economic decline, economic sanctions and the collapse of oil and gas prices. There are now signs however, that its complex troubles are pushing certain companies towards a restructuring or insolvency position.

In light of the UK’s cram down and director-friendly processes, in particular its scheme of arrangement model, major European economies such as France, Germany and Italy have worked hard to develop regimes that give greater emphasis to pre-insolvency alternatives. These new regimes create cram down mechanisms and encourage debtor-in-possession (DIP) financings, ultimately aiming to make restructuring plans more accessible, more efficient, and crucially more reliable; essentially more in tune with the Anglo-American approach to insolvency and restructuring.

Much like the English Scheme of Arrangement which has become a popular debt restructuring solution for international debtors, the English High Court is an attractive forum for insolvency litigation thanks to the potent combination of wide-ranging powers available to Insolvency Practitioners (IPs) under the Insolvency Act 1986, and the increasing availability of litigation funding arrangements in the London market.

Liability management exercises (“LMEs”) are increasing in the bond and capital market and are often used in relatively benign situations. They are certainly not always a precursor to a full-scale restructuring or insolvency.

Prior to the recent collapse in oil values, prices existed at over $100 a barrel for over three years. It made the economics of oil exploration, production and sale comparatively straightforward, but embedded costs into the industry.

On March 11, 2016, the Seventh Circuit ruled that a distressed company’s termination of a lease pursuant to an agreement with its landlord and the relinquishment of its leasehold interest to its landlord constituted “transfers” that may be avoidable as fraudulent transfers and preferences under the Bankruptcy Code.  The decision, Official Comm. Of Unsecured Creditors v. T.D. Invs. I, LLP (In re Great Lakes Quick Lube LP, 816 F.3d 482 (7th Cir. 2016)), serves as a cautionary tale for landlords dealing with distressed tenants.

Background

Legal & Regulatory

BRRD: FCA publishes modification by consent for Article 55 rules

Recent Developments in Bankruptcy Law, April 2016 (Covering cases reported through 545 B.R. 785 and 810 F.3d 860) RICHARD LEVIN Partner +1 (212) 891-1601 [email protected] © Copyright 2016 Jenner & Block LLP. 353 North Clark Street Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Jenner & Block is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Second Circuit holds that Bankruptcy Code preempts creditors’ state law constructive fraud claims.

In re China Medical Technologies, Inc., 539 B.R. 643 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) (No. 12-BR-13736)において、倒産手続 における会社の清算人は、同社の監査委員会に向けて外部弁護士が実施した倒産前の内部調査に関連 する資料にアクセスすることを求めた。破産裁判所は、外部弁護士に対し、秘匿特権で保護されない 資料の提出を命じたが、弁護士と依頼人の間の秘匿特権や職務活動の法理（ワークプロダクトの法 理）で保護される資料については提出を命じなかった。清算人は、提出が命じられなかったこれらの 資料につき、控訴した。当事者は、本件で先例となる秘匿特権についての判例はCFTC v.