We at The Bankruptcy Cave applaud the recent ruling by Judge Whipple of the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Ohio, seeking to make the post-confirmation parties, processes, and procedures far more transparent. In In re Affordable Med Scrubs, LLC,[1] Judge Whipple declined to approve a disclosure statement for a debtor’s liquidating plan.
We’ve all seen it. The business opportunity looks enticing but is laced with risk about a potential bankruptcy filing down the road. As bankruptcy lawyers we are often asked how deals can be structured to prevent a potential bankruptcy filing.
Editor’s Note: On June 16, 2016, The Bankruptcy Cave gave you our summary of the controversial Sabine decision. At that time, post-hearing motions were pending.
The effect of EU law on UK insolvencies is, as a general rule, limited to cross-border issues. Within the EU, the EC Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings governs all the main jurisdictional and choice of law questions that arise in international insolvencies (with the exception of the insolvencies of banks, insurers and certain investment companies).
On March 9, 2016, Bankruptcy Judge Shelley Chapman of the Southern District of New York issued her decision on the Debtor’s motion to reject certain contracts in Sabine Oil & Gas Corporation’s Chapter 11 case.[i] The decision, which allowed Sabine to reject “gathering agreements”
A recent decision out of a New Jersey Bankruptcy Court highlights a loophole in the Bankruptcy Code which may allow Chapter 7 debtors to keep significant assets out of the hands of trustees and creditors.
Veidojot tiesiskumā balstītu uzņēmējdarbības vidi, Ārvalstu investoru padome Latvijā (ĀIPL) organizēja paneļdiskusiju un augsta līmeņa tikšanos valdībā, turpinot jau ilggadējo sadarbību ar nolūku sekmēt kvalitatīvu investīciju piesaisti.
26. maija paneļdiskusijā biroja vecākais partneris Māris Vainovskis pārstāvēja ĀIPL tiesu sistēmas efektivitātes un investīciju aizsardzības darba grupu par tiesiskuma jautājumiem Latvijā.
A recent case from the 11th Circuit illustrates the procedural perils of litigation arising from a bankruptcy case but ultimately tried in the district court. In Rosenberg v.
The Supreme Court’s Decision:
2016 is turning out to be a year of significant reform of insurance law. The Insurance Act comes into force on 16 August 2016 and now we know that the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 will finally come into force on 1 August 2016, having been updated by the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Regulations 2016.