In Blight v Brewster [2012] EWHC 165 (Ch) the High Court allowed a creditor to enforce his judgment debt against a debtor's pension funds. The court followed a 2011 Privy Council case (Tasarruf Mevduati Sinorta Fonu v Merrill Lynch Bank and Trust Company & ors) in holding that it had jurisdiction to do so under section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981. Section 37 provides that the court may appoint a receiver in all cases in which it appears to the court to be just and convenient to do so.
There have been rumours in the pensions industry for a while that the Bonas case was not in fact the first contribution notice (CN) case to be decided by the Regulator's Determination Panel (Panel). In March 2012 these rumours proved to be true when the embargo in the case of the Desmond Pension Scheme was lifted and details were published for the first time. This speedbrief considers the Panel's determination to impose contribution notices on two individuals (Mr Desmond and Mr Gordon) and the Upper Tribunal's decision on various preliminary iss
The Court of Appeal has recently published its decision in the case of Woodcock v Cumbria PCT. This case has attracted a significant amount of attention in the media as the case looks at the extent to which employers can rely on cost considerations to justify discrimination. Although the case does not break new ground, it does show that economic factors can be taken into consideration by employers in some cases.
Background
On April 5th, the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards announced the approval of new rules regarding the disclosure of information concerning a CFP who has declared bankruptcy. CFP Board Announcement.
On March 28th, the House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee held hearings on MF Global, whose October 2011 collapse has raised questions concerning the protection of customer money. In her prepared remarks MF Global's general counsel Laurie Ferber described the days and hours preceding the firm's bankruptcy filing, including the two wire transfers that some have seen as evidence that the firm improperly used customer money, and about which JP Morgan (the ultimate recipient of the funds), had questions.
In the matter of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (In Administration) and in the matter of the Insolvency Act 1986 [2012] UKSC 6 On appeal from [2010] EWCA Civ 917
Summary
Defanging Stern v. Marshall1: The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Modifies the Reference of Bankruptcy Matters to Address Issues Resulting from the Supreme Court’s Ruling
Commercial Agreements -v- Commercial Reality: Supreme Court further develops principles of contractual interpretation?
Rainy Sky S.A. and others v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50
Summary
On February 10, 2012, Judge Sean H. Lane of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York issued a ruling in a Chapter 15 bankruptcy proceeding where The Containership Company (TCC) is the debtor. Numerous shippers in the proceeding requested that the Bankruptcy Court defer to the Federal Maritime Commission with respect to the shippers' claims that TCC violated the Shipping Act of 1984.
On February 1st, the Tenth Circuit held that Deutsche Bank failed to establish it was a "party of interest" entitled to relief from a bankruptcy petition's automatic stay. After Deutsche Bank's foreclosure of the Millers' home was stayed by the latter's bankruptcy petition, the bank obtained relief from the stay. On appeal, the Tenth Circuit reversed and remanded. The bank failed to provide the original note to the bankruptcy court and did not provide the original or a copy to the bankruptcy appellate panel.