Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 continues to be a useful tool available to creditors for challenging transactions at an undervalue.
Section 423 gives the English court the power to set aside a transaction (most notably an asset disposal or a dividend) entered into by a debtor if the value of the consideration received by that debtor is significantly less than the value of the consideration the debtor provides to the other party to the transaction. Creditors ought to bear in mind this power when scrutinising a debtor’s previous actions.
House of Fraser, the struggling UK department store has gone into administration but is to be acquired by billionaire Mike Ashley, the owner of Sports Direct. There are regulatory difficulties with his acquisition of the Dundrum branch at the moment, but it is anticipated that the entire group including Dundrum will be fully operational in good time to capitalise on the Christmas market.
However, what does this mean for customers with unused gift cards?
A recent case in the UK (Phones 4U Limited -v- EE Limited) serves as a warning to businesses of the unintended, and potentially costly, consequences of issuing inadequate termination notices to contractual counterparties.
Background
McDowell Purcell represented a creditor in a recent application to the High Court where Justice Costello granted an Order for Sale on foot of an equitable charge held by the applicant, over properties of the respondent who had been adjudicated a bankrupt.
Application
Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (USA) with affiliated limited liability partnerships conducting the practice in France, Italy, Singapore, and the United Kingdom and as affiliated partnerships conducting the practice in Hong Kong and Japan. Latham & Watkins operates in South Korea as a Foreign Legal Consultant Office. Latham & Watkins works in cooperation with the Law Office of Salman M. Al-Sudairi in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Possible application of Section 101(22)(A) to safe harbor’s covered entity requirement raises important questions for future transferee defendants.
Key Points:
• Merit Management raises the possibility that customers of “financial institutions” may qualify for protection under Section 546(e) safe harbor even if they would not otherwise meet Section 546(e)’s covered entity requirement.
• Treating customers of “financial institutions” as covered entities could broaden the scope of safe harbor.
UK-based offshore and subsea oil & gas services company solidifies its position and completes ownership transfer to noteholders in major company milestone.
The High Court delivered a stark reminder to personal insolvency practitioners (PIPs) that they serve an integral role in upholding the legitimacy of the bankruptcy process in a judgment delivered on 5 February 2018.
Background
The judgment arose out of an application by the Official Assignee (“OA”) to postpose the automatic discharge of a bankrupt. The OA submitted that the bankrupt had hidden assets from or failed to disclose assets which could have been realised for the benefit of the creditors of her estate.
Venezuela’s initiative is unlikely to set the stage for a restructuring of international obligations in the face of US sanctions.
Key Points:
• US sanctions will prohibit US persons from engaging in a restructuring of Venezuela and PdVSA debts that includes the issuance of “new” long term debt.
• Creditors should expect that enforcement action will follow a default. The outcomes of that enforcement action will affect all stakeholders, whether or not they participate.
Restructuring Announcement
Ruling overturns New York decision rejecting market-based approach.
Key Points:
• Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit requires courts to consider efficient market interest rate, if available, for purposes of chapter 11 “cramdown.”
• Second Circuit decision overturns lower court ruling that used “formula approach” to determine appropriate chapter 11 cramdown interest rate.