In the first Part 26A appeal decision since the inception of the restructuring plan in 2020, the Court of Appeal has set aside the restructuring plan sanction order that was granted to German real estate group, Adler.
You can’t make this stuff up. The legal issues are pedestrian. But the facts behind those issues are incredible!
Litigation History
Here’s the boring stuff first.
On January 8, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court denies certiorari in Mann v. LSQ Funding Group, L.C. (Case No. 23-425). Here’s the procedural background:
Fiduciary Duties of Receivers
Receivers appointed to enforce a security owe their fiduciary duties to their appointor and not to the mortgagor. So, when realising the assets of the mortgagor, the receivers can focus their attention on pursuing that course of action which, as they judge it, is best calculated to optimise the position of their appointor; Salmon v Albarran [2023] NSWSC 1238 ("Salmon").
Oral arguments happened on January 9, 2024, at the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S.Trustee v. Hammons.Here is a link to the transcript of those arguments.
The Hammons question is this:
2023 is the year that the need for a uniform state law on assignments for benefit of creditors became obvious.
And a Drafting Committee at the Uniform Law Commission began working in 2023 to create such a law.
Here are some of the reasons why the need became obvious.
Background and Purpose
Following the Government's response to the UNCITRAL consultation (see our briefing here) - which suggests that, for a while at least, the rule in Gibbs is here to stay - we expect to see an increase in parallel proceedings being used when multijurisdictional corporate groups seek to restructure their debt.
2023 has been a good year for developing the law of Subchapter V through court rulings and opinions. Here are some of the highs and lows of that development.
Working as Intended
If 2023 shows us anything, it’s this: Subchapter V is working as intended.
Subchapter V has developed into the efficient and effective tool for business reorganization it was intended to be. That’s true, whether the reorganization is in the form of continued operations or liquidation. Such a tool did not exist before Subchapter V.
In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issues its unanimous Siegel v. Fitzgerald opinion. The question in that opinion is:
Here’s my biggest bankruptcy shocker from 2023:
- the Third Circuit’s rationale for dismissing Johnson & Johnson’s bankruptcy.
I’ll try to explain.
Appalled
I’m still appalled by the lack of concern, from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in its dismissal opinion, over these disparities it describes in results for similarly situated claimants:
“Bankruptcy provides a valuable and desirable venue for the resolution of [mass tort] disputes” by: