In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit closed the door on triangular setoffs, ruling that the mutuality requirement under Section 553 of the Bankruptcy Code must be strictly construed and requires that the debt and claim sought to be setoff must be between the same two parties. In re: Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc., No. 20-1136 (3d. Cir. 2021).

Background

Key Takeaways

Key Takeaways

In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the election of a tenant, under Section 365(h) of the Bankruptcy Code, to remain in possession of real property governed by a rejected lease causes a third-party guaranty on another rejected agreement to remain in effect, to the extent such agreement and the lease are part of an integrated transaction.

A recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals, Sutton v. Pilevsky held that federal bankruptcy law does not preempt state law tortious interference claims against non-debtors who participated in a scheme that caused a debtor—in this case a bankruptcy remote special purpose entity—to breach contractual obligations intended to ensure that the entity remains a Special Purpose Entity (SPE) and to facilitate the lenders’ enforcement of remedies upon a future bankruptcy filing, if any.

A recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals, Sutton v. Pilevsky held that federal bankruptcy law does not preempt state law tortious interference claims against non-debtors who participated in a scheme that caused a debtor—in this case a bankruptcy remote special purpose entity—to breach contractual obligations intended to ensure that the entity remains a Special Purpose Entity (SPE) and to facilitate the lenders’ enforcement of remedies upon a future bankruptcy filing, if any.

Karen McMaster, Ben Andrews and James Cameron, Milbank LLP

This is an extract from the 2020 edition of GRR's the Europe, Middle East and Africa Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

In summary

Cristóbal Eyzaguirre B, Rodrigo Ochagavía R-T and Santiago Bravo S, Claro & Cia

This is an extract from the 2021 edition of GRR's The Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

In summary

DJ Miller, Thornton Grout Finnigan

This is an extract from the 2021 edition of GRR's The Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

In summary

This chapter highlights the flexible nature of Canada’s restructuring regime, where creative solutions to novel and complex issues are welcomed by the judiciary.

Discussion points

Luiz Fernando Valente de Paiva, Giuliano Colombo, Andre Marques, Carolina Kiyomi Iwamoto and Ana Beatriz Araujo Ribeiro do Valle, Pinheiro Neto Advogados

This is an extract from the 2021 edition of GRR's The Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

In summary