The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that a bankruptcy court lacks the power to enforce discharge injunctions entered in other districts, and that the debtors’ particular private education loans were not excepted from discharge.

A copy of the opinion in Crocker v. Navient Solutions, LLC is available at: Link to Opinion.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed a bankruptcy court order denying a bank’s motion to compel arbitration, holding that when a debtor seeks to enforce a discharge injunction, a bankruptcy court may decline to compel arbitration because it implicates a bankruptcy court’s ability to enforce its own orders.

A copy of the opinion in Henry v. Educational Financial Service is available at: Link to Opinion.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed in part and reversed in part a trial court’s judgment against a debtor who filed an adversary proceeding alleging that a creditor and its counsel violated the bankruptcy discharge by trying to collect a discharged debt, holding that the attorney could not be held in contempt because he lacked knowledge of the discharge, but the creditor could be held liable for the actions of its counsel under agency law.

On September 10, 2019, Madrid Commercial Court number 6 delivered a decision arguing that it was necessary to examine whether the prior notice under article 5 bis of the Insolvency Law stemmed from steps taken to prepare or perform serious and effective negotiations.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently reversed a bankruptcy court’s ruling that a lender failed to perfect its security interest because its UCC financing statement failed to provide sufficient indication of the secured collateral under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the bankruptcy court’s denial of a debtor-borrower’s motion for sanctions, which alleged that her mortgage loan servicer violated her bankruptcy discharge by mailing a communication in a purported attempt to collect upon a discharged debt.

El Tribunal Supremo dictó el pasado 2 de julio una sentencia pionera en la que se abordan los requisitos para conseguir la liberación de deudas a través del mecanismo de la llamada segunda oportunidad. En nuestro ordenamiento se conoce a la segunda oportunidad como beneficio de exoneración del pasivo insatisfecho (BEPI) y es una herramienta que pueden utilizar las personas físicas (empresarios, autónomos o consumidores fuertemente endeudados) para liberarse de sus deudas, que les serán condonadas, permitiéndoles emprender nuevos proyectos.

In determining the legal standard for holding a creditor in civil contempt for attempting to collect a debt in violation of a bankruptcy discharge order, the Supreme Court of the United States adopted an “objectively reasonable” standard, and held that a court may hold a creditor in civil contempt if there is “no fair ground of doubt” as to whether the order barred the creditor’s conduct.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, which had applied a subjective standard for civil contempt.

Final provision number three of the Trade Secrets Law, in force since March 13, 2019, authorized the government to approve a revised wording of the Insolvency Law within eight months. Under that authorization, on March 22 the Ministries of Justice and of Economy and Enterprise submitted a bill for the Revised Insolvency Law.

La Disposición Final Tercera de la Ley de Secretos Empresariales, en vigor desde el pasado 13 de marzo, habilitaba al Gobierno a aprobar un texto refundido de la Ley Concursal en el plazo de ocho meses. De acuerdo con dicha habilitación, los Ministerios de Justicia y Economía y Empresa presentaron el 22 de marzo un proyecto de Texto Refundido de la Ley Concursal.