What is a CVA?
A CVA is an insolvency and rescue procedure under the Insolvency Act 1986, allowing a company in financial distress to make legally binding arrangements with its unsecured creditors. Typically, this involves rescheduling or reducing the company’s debts or even amending certain contractual terms.
On July 31, 2018, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association published the ISDA 2018 US Resolution Stay Protocol. The US Protocol is intended to enable parties to ISDA Master Agreements and similar "Protocol Covered Agreements" (collectively, PCAs) to contractually recognize the cross-border application of special resolution regimes applicable to global systemically important entities and their affiliates.
In this alert, we provide a broad overview of the US Protocol and relevant resolution stay rules, then describe the effect and operation of the US Protocol.
The Fed and the FDIC, in an August 30 joint press release, announced that they are extending the filing deadline for Prudential Financial Inc. and four major foreign banking organizations to submit their resolution plans. Prudential Financial, a designated nonbank SIFI pursuant to Dodd-Frank, will now have until December 31, 2019, to submit its living will, a year later than previously required (and following previous extensions).
On Sunday 26 August the UK Government confirmed its intention, when Parliamentary time permits, to introduce radical proposals to reform insolvency law. The moves, announced in “Insolvency and Corporate Governance – Government Response”, proposes the introduction of a new moratorium to give viable, but financially distressed companies breathing space to address their problems.
A Csődtörvényt módosító új javaslattal kapcsolatban az elmúlt napokban egy népszerű hírportálon jelent meg nagyobb terjedelmű írás „Lex reptér: törvény, ami az egész magyar gazdaságot veszélyezteti” címmel. Blogbejegyzésemben amellett érvelek, hogy amennyiben a követelésbehajtási célú felszámolási eljárásokat jogi realitásként elfogadjuk, úgy a módosítás alapvetően jó irányba mutat.
In Coosemans Miami v. Arthur (In re Arthur), the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida held last week that individuals in control of a PACA trust may still receive a bankruptcy discharge of debts arising from their breach of such PACA trust. A link to the opinion is here.
The Fifth Circuit recently issued an opinion that federal bankruptcy law does not prohibit a bona fide shareholder from exercising its right to vote against a bankruptcy filing notwithstanding that such shareholder was also an unsecured creditor. This represents the latest successful attempt to preclude bankruptcy through golden shares or bankruptcy blocking provisions in corporate authority documents.
On June 14, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a revised opinion that held that Federal law does not prevent a bona fide shareholder from exercising its right to vote against a bankruptcy petition just because it is also an unsecured creditor. In re Franchise Servs. of N. Am., Inc., 891 F.3d 198, 203 (5th Cir. 2018), as revised (June 14, 2018).
Weird things happen in bankruptcy court. All you high-falutin Chapter 11 jokers out there, cruise down to the bankruptcy motions calendar one day.
Bankruptcy courts have authority to hold in civil contempt one who refuses to comply with a bankruptcy court order, including incarceration and/or daily fines until the offender complies.[1] But when does civil contempt[2] cross into criminal contempt, which is punitive and outside