The Supreme Court may revisit two of the many questions left open by its much-discussed decision in Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011), an opinion famous not only for its subject – the estate of the late actress and model Anna Nicole Smith – but also for redefining the allocation of judicial authority between an Article III federal district court and a bankruptcy court. Appellants have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v.
A recent decision by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York1 found that a UCC-3 termination statement filed on behalf of a secured creditor was not effective because it lacked the proper authorization.
Introduction
On 29 January 2013, the Federal Court of Australia made orders approving the creditors’ scheme of arrangement between Nine Entertainment Group Pty Limited (NEG) and its senior and mezzanine lenders (Nine Scheme).
The Nine Scheme, made under Part 5.1 of the Corporations Act, follows Alinta and Centro as the third debt for equity restructuring of a major Australian company in as many years.
This is the second case in which the New South Wales Supreme Court has granted an extension of time for registration of a security interest on the Personal Property Securities Register where the delay is accidental or due to inadvertence. However, the extension in this case was conditional firstly, by preserving the priority of another security interest which had been registered in the meantime and secondly, because there was insufficient evidence of the financial position of the grantor to establish that an extension was unlikely to prejudice other creditors or shareholde
ASIC has made a brand new start to the way insolvency notices will be published in Australia. From 1 July 2012 the previous obligations for publications have melted away.
While the winding up of a company is a last resort in the context of shareholder oppression, the discretion to order a winding up will be exercised by the Courts if the circumstances dictate that it is the most appropriate remedy, such as where it will provide finality and certainty for the shareholders without undermining the value of the company’s projects to a potential purchaser on winding up.
ASIC’s new administrative powers to wind up companies strengthens the remedial measures that can be taken against business operators attempting to avoid liabilities by abandoning companies and should help employees access their entitlements.
The Corporations Amendment (Phoenixing and Other Measures) Act 2012 (Cth) (Act) will commence on 1 July 2012.
The Corporations Amendment (Phoenixing and Other Measures) Bill 2012 (Cth) was introduced into Federal parliament on 15 February 2012.
The Bill proposes to amend theCorporations Act 2001 (Cth) and contains 2 key sets of measures:
The Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York held recently that § 550 of the Bankruptcy Code does not limit the potential recovery on fraudulent transfer claims to the amount of unpaid creditor claims against a debtor’s estate. According to the Court, the language in § 550(a) that states that a plaintiff in an avoidance action can recover the property transferred or the value of the property “for the benefit of the estate” provides a “floor” rather than a “ceiling” on recovery.