In re Bronk (Cirilli v. Bronk), No. 13-1123 (7th Cir. Jan. 5, 2015), resolved a couple of “questions of first impression,” slip op.

A recent Bankruptcy Court decision in New Jersey took an unusual approach in determining  the rights of the debtors’ trademark licensees following the debtors’ rejection of the licenses as executory contracts. In In re Crumbs Bake Shop, Inc., Case No.

Though often overlooked, bankruptcy sales can be a real boon to businesses looking for a great deal. Prospective purchasers must, of course, interface with the bankruptcy court, so these companies must understand the lay of the land when looking for a bargain. For example, in the last two years, Wanxiang Group purchased 

Vigilantibus non dormientibus, æquitas subvenit.

* * * * *

Though often overlooked, bankruptcy sales can be a real boon to businesses looking for a great deal. Prospective purchasers must, of course, interface with the bankruptcy court, so these companies must understand the lay of the land when looking for a bargain.

Under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act1, trustees have considerable discretion to administer a bankrupt’s estate in an expedient manner. However, the British Columbia Court of Appeal recently confirmed that trustees must exercise such discretion within the limits of relevant statutory provisions and common law principles.

From the consumer plaintiffs’ perspective, a recent appellate decision in Rundgren v. Washington Mutual Bank, FA, is far from Utopia.

I.  Introduction

Canadian restructuring and liquidation legislation provides struggling companies and bankruptcy trustees with powerful tools to restructure their affairs and maximize value for stakeholders. For example, in the right circumstances valuable contracts can be assigned, on notice to the counterparties, to buyers prepared to pay well for the rights conferred under the contracts. In such circumstances, the counterparty’s bargained for right to withhold its consent to an assignment can be effectively overridden by court order.

On April 29, 2014, power giant Energy Future Holding Corp. (“Energy Future”), along with 70 subsidiaries, filed for chapter 11 protection in the District of Delaware as part of a deal it has reached through lengthy negotiations with some of its largest senior creditors to restructure roughly $50 billion in debt.