Hot on the heels of the landmark changes to the insolvency landscape brought by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) (see our previous article on CIGA), the Government recently announced reforms relating to pre-packaged administration sales to connected parties.
The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (the "Court") recently handed down a decision in the case of BDO Cayman Ltd. and BDO Trinity Ltd. v Ardent Harmony Fund Inc. (In Official Liquidation). This case provides helpful guidance on the exercise of the Court's discretion to grant leave to commence proceedings against a company in liquidation.
Background
Practical Effects Of Significant Reforms To Guernsey’s Insolvency Law With reference to practical examples from England & Wales, this briefing note seeks to highlight three areas of change that will be of particular interest to Insolvency Practitioners, directors involved with Guernsey companies and their professional advisors once the Companies (Guernsey) Law, 2008 (Insolvency) (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 (the “Ordinance”) comes into force. Enhanced Investigatory Powers The Ordinance extends insolvency professionals’ powers in four important respects.
We recently reported on Delaware Judge Christopher Sontchi’s decision in the Extraction bankruptcy to permit the rejection of midstream gathering agreements.1 Fellow Delaware Judge Karen Owens followed Extraction in the Southland Royalty decision issued November 13, 2020.2 Judge Owens determined that Southland Royalty Company, LLC (“Southland”), an E&P operator with assets primarily in Wyoming, could reject the gas gathering agreement and sell its assets free and clear of the agreement.
Summary of decisions In re Body Transit, Inc., No. BR 2010014 ELF, 2020 WL 1486784 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. Mar. 24, 2020).
Straffi v Aeris Bank (In re Hillesland), No. 1925278( CMG), 2020 Bankr. LEXIS 2235 (Bankr. D.N.J. Aug. 17, 2020).
Case Snapshot The Bankruptcy Court held that a chapter 7 trustee could avoid judgment creditor’s lien pursuant to his “strongarm” powers under section 544(a) of the bankruptcy code because the judgment creditor did not make a good faith effort to locate debtor’s personal property before it levied against real property, as required under applicable New Jersey law.
In re Tribune Company, et al. No. 182909 (3d Cir. filed Aug. 26, 2020).
Case Snapshot
In re Affordable Auto Repair, Inc., No. 6:19bk18367MW, 2020 Bankr. LEXIS 2366 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. Sept. 2, 2020).
Case Snapshot
2020 has seen a significant increase in chapter 11 filings by oil and gas producers. Critical to the operations of these companies, and to the transportation and processing of the producer’s gas, are gathering agreements entered into between the producers and midstream companies. A pivotal question posed at the start of these chapter 11 proceedings is whether the gathering agreements are executory contracts subject to rejection or whether they create real property interests that cannot be rejected in chapter 11 proceedings. The answer depends on who you ask.
In a recent decision of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (the “Grand Court”) in the matter of Sun Cheong Creative Development Holdings Limited (FSD 160 of 2020), the Chief Justice considered the principles applicable to the appointment of “soft touch” provisional liquidators to effect the restructuring of a Hong Kong-listed Cayman Islands company where two competing winding up petitions were filed before the High Court of Hong Kong (the ("HK Petitions" and the “HK Court” respectively).