In a decision rendered on June 6, 2022, Justice Sotomayor authored the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in the case Siegel v. Fitzgerald, holding that a statutory increase in United States Trustee’s fees violated the “uniformity” requirement of the Bankruptcy Clause set forth in Article I, § 7, cl. 4 of the United States Constitution, which empowers Congress to establish “uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.”1  

On October 12, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court denied, without comment, a petition for a writ of certiorari in a case challenging the doctrine of equitable mootness. Equitable mootness has been described as a “narrow doctrine by which an appellate court deems it prudent for practical reasons to forbear deciding an appeal when to grant the relief requested will undermine the finality and reliability of consummated plans of reorganization.”1 By his petition, David Hargreaves—an unsecured noteholder of debtor Nuverra Environmental Solutions Inc.

On 28 June 2021, Zacaroli J declined to sanction a restructuring plan (the “Plan”) in respect of Hurricane Energy PLC (the “Company”) under section 901F of the Companies Act 2006 (“CA 2006”). The Company is part of a group whose business is extracting oil stored within fractures in solid rock beneath the sea.

1. "German Scheme" available from 1 January 2021 in (slightly) modified form

The German Federal Parliament finally adopted the long-awaited bill to introduce a new pre-insolvency business stabilization and restructuring regime into German law.1 The new law was published in the German Federal Gazette on 29 December 2020 and will enter into force on 1 January 2021.

In several recent judgments in cases centring on complex commercial and regulatory disputes, the High Court has grappled with a number of important aspects of legal professional privilege under English law. Certain of these decisions, and their implications for parties to such disputes, are highlighted below.

Litigation privilege: sole or dominant purpose

October Bankruptcy Developments

In a victory for minority noteholders opposing an out-of-court restructuring of their distressed issuer, New York's highest court ruled last week that a holder's right to receive or sue for payment on its notes survived an exercise of statutory remedies by the trustee, conducted at the direction of a noteholder majority, that would have cancelled the holder's notes without its consent and replaced them with equity securities.

1. Background and Overview

As described in our Client Alert "The new German business stabilization and restructuring regime ("German Scheme")" dated 12 October 2020, the German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection had presented a draft bill (the "Original Bill") to introduce a new business stabilization and restructuring framework - the new "German Scheme" - into German law.

The German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection has recently presented the longawaited draft bill to introduce a new pre-insolvency business stabilization and restructuring regime into German law.1 The availability of this ground-breaking new "German Scheme" will significantly change the German restructuring landscape and elevate it to an internationally competitive level.

On Monday 14th September 2020, Mrs Justice Falk issued her reasoned judgment, in respect of the application by Codere Finance 2 (UK) Limited (the "Company") to convene a single class of its creditors to consider and vote on a proposed scheme of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 ( the "Scheme").

In a hearing spanning three days, the High Court of England and Wales addressed multiple grounds of challenge from a dissenting noteholder but nonetheless granted the Company's request to convene a single meeting of its scheme creditors.

Background