Richard J Cooper, Lisa M Schweitzer, Jessica A Metzger and Richard C Minott, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Peter Ferrer, Harneys
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Gregg Galardi, Daniel Anderson, Matthew Czyzyk, Janice Ng, Natalie Blanc and Emily Ma, Ropes & Gray
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Juan Carlos Machorro, Carlos Olvera and Ricardo Orea, Santamarina y Steta
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Gianfranco Lotito, Cuatrecasas
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Mark Goodman and Katie Logan, Campbells
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Ken Baird, Mark Liscio, Michael Broeders, Marvin Knapp, Samantha Braunstein, Katharina Crinson, Laurent Mabilat, Ana Lóppez and Silvia Anggós, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
John Wasty, John Riihiluoma, Lalita Vaswani and James Batten, Appleby
This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's the Americas Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
In what has been referred to as a “momentous decision for company law”, the Supreme Court recently considered whether, when a company is in the ‘insolvency zone’, its directors must have regard to the interests of its creditors in addition to, or instead of, its shareholders.
In a judgment rendered on 10 October 2021, the Dubai Court of First Instance had concluded that current and former directors and managers of Marka were personally liable towards creditors of the company merely on the basis that the assets of the company were not sufficient to pay at least 20% of its debts. The 20% threshold was set in onshore Federal Decree Law No. (9) of 2016 on Bankruptcy (the Bankruptcy Law) as it then was, and the Court determined that liability applied to current and former directors and managers without distinction where the threshold is not met.