Two priority issues arise between creditors of a common debtor:

As discussed in an earlier post called “Moving Up: Bankruptcy Code Dollar Amounts Will Increase On April 1, 2019,” various dollar amounts in the Bankruptcy Code and related statutory provisions were increased for cases filed on or after today, April 1, 2019.

The Court of Appeal decision in Triple Point Technology Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd turns on the wording of that particular contract, but was, in part, unexpected.

This decision does not reflect the generally held view (prior to this case) that liquidated damages will be recoverable until the point of termination at least.

Background

1. Introduction

The Supreme Court held oral argument earlier today in the Mission Products v. Tempnology case, on the issue of the effect of rejection by a licensor of a trademark license on the licensee’s rights.

What should your company do if faced with a statutory demand or a winding up petition? Time is of the essence where there is a threat of formal insolvency proceedings. If a winding up petition is being threatened it must not be ignored. The consequences that can flow once a winding up petition has been advertised can be devastating, both to the company's reputation and its financial position.

We identify some of the key considerations and steps that should be taken immediately so as to reduce any damage that a winding up petition can cause.

An official notice from the Judicial Conference of the United States was just published announcing that certain dollar amounts in the Bankruptcy Code will be increased about 6.2% this time for new cases filed on or after April 1, 2019.

The Big Question. What is the effect of rejection of a trademark license by a debtor-licensor? Over the past few years, this blog has followed the Tempnology case out of New Hampshire raising just that issue.

On February 4, 2019, the Court of Appeal of Quebec released its decision in the matter of Callidus Capital Corporation and al. v.9354-9186 Québec Inc. (formerly Bluberi Gaming Technologies Inc.).

Le 4 février 2019, la Cour d'appel du Québec a rendu sa décision dans l'affaire Callidus Capital Corporation et al. c. 9354-9186 Québec Inc.