In Whirlpool Corporation v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al. (In re hhgregg, Inc.), No. 18-3363 (7th Cir. Feb. 11, 2020), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA“) created a federal priority rule rendering a secured lender’s first-priority, floating liens on inventory superior to the reclamation claims of a trade vendor. The facts in the case are typical, and the holding does not mark a demonstrative shift in common practice.

Facts

The Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (“SBRA“) is in effect as of yesterday, February 19, 2020. The SBRA was enacted to provide smaller business debtors with a more streamlined path to restructuring their debts. Below are some highlights of the new law.

Absolute-Priority Rule

The UAE has pioneered a new insolvency regime for individuals or natural persons with the issuance of the stand-alone Insolvency Law No. 19 of 2019 (Insolvency Law), which has come to effect as of 30 November 2019.

The Insolvency Law is intended to provide sufficient protections to natural or civil persons who are facing financial distress and are unable to settle their debts, unlike the UAE Bankruptcy Law which regulates commercial companies and individuals considered as traders under the Commercial Transactions Code.

The UAE has pioneered a new insolvency regime for individuals or natural persons with the issuance of the stand-alone Insolvency Law No. 19 of 2019 (Insolvency Law), which has come to effect as of 30 November 2019.

The Insolvency Law is intended to provide sufficient protections to natural or civil persons who are facing financial distress and are unable to settle their debts, unlike the UAE Bankruptcy Law which regulates commercial companies and individuals considered as traders under the Commercial Transactions Code.

In LNV Corporation v. Ad Hoc Group of Second Lien Creditors (In re La Paloma Generating Company, LLC, Adv. Pro. No 19-50110 (JTD) (D. Del. January 13, 2020), a Delaware bankruptcy court recently held that actions taken by a senior secured creditor to enforce its rights under an intercreditor agreement did not constitute a breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealings owed to the junior lienholders. The circumstances in La Paloma are not uncommon.

Background

In re Markus, 607 B.R. 379 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2019) [click for opinion]  

To date, EU-wide insolvency legislation has focused on resolving conflicts of laws issues between Member States. Now that the Preventive Restructuring Framework Directive (the "Directive")¹ has successfully navigated its way through the Council and European Parliament (albeit with some significant amendments to the original text), all of that is set to change.

The global economy is growing at about 3% a year. This is roughly equal to the average growth rate for the last 50 years. However, growth predictions are ticking slightly downwards, mainly due to concerns around trade. And there are still high levels of government and corporate debt arising from the financial crisis and subsequent period of low interest rates. Nowhere is this better illustrated than China, which is forecast to overtake the US as the world's largest economy as early as this year, on some measures.

The laws of preferential and fraudulent transfers under the Bankruptcy Code can often seem theoretical and formulaic. When certain boxes are checked, it appears, at first blush, that a pre-bankruptcy transfer can be avoided, regardless of any intent or surrounding circumstances.

In MicroBilt Corporation v. Ranger Specialty Income Fund, L.P. et al. (In re Princeton AlternativeIncome Fund,LP), Case No. 3:18-CV-16557 (D.N.J. Nov. 27, 2019), the District Court for the District of New Jersey recently affirmed a bankruptcy court's decision to appoint a chapter 11 trustee, without conducting a traditional evidentiary hearing.  The holding reinforces that a bankruptcy court has broad discretion to grant extreme remedies in a case.

Facts