With the increase in global trade and business, often involving complex corporate structures in multiple jurisdictions, we expect to see a significant increase in cross-border insolvency and restructuring matters in coming years. This is especially the case with rapid advancements in technology and digital change driving “borderless” transactions and investments in every industry.
In an opinion yesterday, Judge McMahon vacated the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy settlement because she found that the bankruptcy court lacked authority to issue releases in favor of the Sackler family.
Buried inside the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, which the President signed into law on December 27, 2020, is a critical provision that will help keep U.S. trade flowing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the bankruptcy relief section temporarily amends the U.S.
The COVID-19 crisis has imposed difficult global challenges on the retail industry. Mass closures of brick and mortar store fronts and supply chain disruptions have resulted in an unprecedented halt to business activities. Nevertheless, there are some steps retailers can take to better protect their business interests.
Given the material impact that coronavirus is having on businesses, on March 28, 2020 the government announced that legislation would be forthcoming amending UK insolvency laws to:
On December 12, 2019, the Sixth Circuit issued an opinion[1] in the ongoing bankruptcy proceedings of FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. The decision upheld the ability of a bankruptcy court to decide whether a power purchaser in bankruptcy proceedings can reject FERC-approved power purchase agreements (PPAs).
With two decisions (No. 1895/2018 and No. 1896/2018), both filed on 25 January 2018, the Court of Cassation reached opposite conclusions in the two different situations
The case
The Constitutional Court (6 December 2017) confirmed that Art. 147, para. 5, of the Italian Bankruptcy Law does not violate the Constitution as long as it is interpreted in a broad sense
The case
With the decision No. 1195 of 18 January 2018, the Court of Cassation ruled on the powers of the extraordinary commissioner to require performance of pending contracts and on the treatment of the relevant claims of the suppliers
The case