Overview

If you walk along the seafront in the Lancashire town of Morecambe, you will come across a statue of the late Eric Morecambe. Many of us will remember Eric as half of one of the most famous comic double acts in the United Kingdom. Morecambe and Wise made us laugh, not so much through innuendo but more through the perfect timing of their various on screen exchanges. So important was timing to Eric Morecambe that one of the quotes at the foot of his statue is the phrase "In life, everything is timing".

Overview

Overview

Insolvency practitioners will be familiar with section 283A of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the "Act") and what is commonly termed the 'use it or lose it' provisions. But what exactly is meant by a trustee in bankruptcy being informed or becoming aware of a bankrupt's interest in a property for the purposes of section 283A(5) of the Act?

At first instance, a bankrupt's claim that she had informed her trustee or that her trustee had become aware of such an interest was dismissed. The bankrupt appealed.

Overview

It has been just over 6 years since the Bill for the Prescription (Scotland) Act 2018 ("the 2018 Act") received royal assent. Sections 5 and 13 of the 2018 Act came into force, perhaps earlier than most anticipated, on 1 June 2022. Since then, depending on who you speak to, you are likely to hear differing opinions on whether enough has been done to re-balance the 'defender friendly' discoverability test developed though cases such as Morrison and Gordon's Trustees.

Overview

In a very litigious and long-running saga concerning some land near Bicester, a recent judgment involved parties applying to remove the Administrators.

In summary:

Overview

We asked our team for their predictions of what they think 2025 might bring in the Property Disputes sector.

Insolvencies and Restructuring

In an opinion issued on Sept. 20 by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico, Judge David T. Thuma held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not prevent a bankruptcy court from determining whether the automatic stay applies to pending state court litigation. See In re Shook, Case No. 24-10724-t7 (Bankr. N.M. Sept. 20, 2024) [ECF No. 54].

In a recent legal development that underscores the intricate interplay between federal bankruptcy law and the cannabis industry, a court case has emerged involving a bankruptcy filing by an employee of a cannabis company. It’s well established that, because cannabis is generally considered a controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), certain cannabis related companies are precluded from obtaining debt relief through bankruptcy. Now individuals employed by cannabis companies might find themselves in the same boat. In Blumsack v. Harrington, 2024 Bankr.

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California (“Court”) confirmed a plan for a cannabis-related business (“Debtor”) to sell its equity interests in a Canadian cannabis company, Lowell Farms, and distribute the proceeds to its creditors.

As the cannabis industry matures, there will be winners and losers. Losers lack access to the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Marijuana related assets cannot be sold free and clear of liens and encumbrances via the tried and true bankruptcy section 363 sale, which leaves the loser’s creditors without the best tool to maximize the value of the loser’s assets, and deprives acquirers of a federal court order conveying assets. What’s the state of play, and what’s the alternative for the losers, their creditors, and the companies that would acquire them?

STATE OF PLAY