Fulltext Search

In a notable decision interpreting the March 2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Alabama held that Chapter 13 debtors behind on their payments before March 2020 may seek modification of their plan if they suffered from COVID-19 related financial distress.

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (“the Act”) became law on 26 June 2020. (Read our previous update on the Act here). As has been widely discussed, the Act introduces new corporate insolvency rescue procedures as well as temporary and permanent insolvency and corporate governance measures.

Translating to “now for then,” nunc pro tunc orders grant backdated relief. Such orders are common in bankruptcy cases. For instance, bankruptcy courts often enter orders retroactively approving retention of professionals, and in certain cases even granting retroactive relief from the automatic stay.

Your former employee sues you, but your employee-plaintiff filed for bankruptcy. You diligently research the bankruptcy filings and discover the employee did not disclose the lawsuit against you in those filings, which are sworn to under oath. You might have a winner to get out of the case, right? Well, it is not quite that simple, according to a recent ruling in Georgia.

The UK Government announced on 24 September 2020 that some of the temporary Covid-19 measures introduced under the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (“the Act”) will be extended.

Summary of extension

Summary of extension

In practice, it is not uncommon for bankruptcy debtors to file suit against creditors or debt collectors for stay and discharge injunction violations. Often, they will do so before making any meaningful attempt to communicate with the creditor or debt collector to request that they stop their improper collection efforts.

This article highlights where the legislation, as it was introduced in the Bill, differs from the final form of the Act