Some six years after the United States Supreme Court decided Stern v. Marshall, courts continue to grapple with the decision’s meaning and how much it curtails the exercise of bankruptcy court jurisdiction.[1] The U.S.
In Saw v Wilson, the Court of Appeal held that a second ranking floating charge would be valid and enforceable, even if at the time it was created there were no uncharged assets to which the floating charge could attach.
Facts of the case
A recent decision at Glasgow Sheriff Court has given guidance on the circumstances in which it is appropriate for a former trustee in receipt of a PPI refund to apply to be re-appointed to a sequestrated estate.
On March 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court held that bankruptcy courts cannot approve a “structured dismissal”—a dismissal with special conditions or that does something other than restoring the “prepetition financial status quo”—providing for distributions that deviate from the Bankruptcy Code’s priority scheme absent the consent of affected creditors. Czyzewski v.Jevic Holding Corp., No. 15-649, 580 U.S. ___ (2017), 2017 WL 1066259, at *3 (Mar. 22, 2017).
A significant decision issued last week by a five judge bench of the Inner House has reversed a 40 year old decision on the meaning of 'effectually executed diligence' in a receivership.
Section 60 of the Insolvency Act 1986 provides that in a receivership, all persons who have 'effectually executed diligence' on any part of the property of the company which is subject to the charge by which the receiver is appointed have priority over the holder of the floating charge.
This article looks at the forthcoming pre-action protocol for debt claims in its current form, with an anticipated implementation date around October this year.
There might be further changes ahead, and a shift in the implementation timetable, so please watch this space for further updates.
'Close of business' is a term many people use in their day to day working life without much thought. But what does it actually mean and should the term be used in contractual documentation?
Agreeing to get something done by 'close of business' is a phrase often used when flexibility is required as to the time a task will be completed. It makes it clear the task will be done that day, but not by a particular time. However, what does the term mean when it is included in a contract?
On January 17, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its long-anticipated opinion in Marblegate Asset Management, LLC v. Education Management Finance Corp., 1 ruling that Section 316(b) of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, 15 U.S.C. § 77ppp(b) (the “Act”), prohibits only non-consensual amendments to core payment terms of bond indentures.
On August 2, 2016, the IRS issued proposed regulations taking aim at valuation discounts with respect to closely-held interests for gift, estate and generation-skipping transfer tax purposes. If adopted, even with clarifying language, the proposed regulations will impact certain estate planning strategies.
An opinion issued this week is the first examination by a Scottish court of the principle of 'modified universalism' and the requirements for an enforceable floating charge where all the company's property is situated in a non-UK jurisdiction.
This opinion by Lord Tyre in the Court of Session concerns three companies incorporated in Scotland, but which carried on business in India.