On February 17, 2016, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) (collectively, the “agencies”) jointly proposed a rule to supplement the statutory provisions of Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act (the “Orderly Liquidation Authority” or “OLA”) that govern the orderly liquidation of a “covered broker or dealer”—i.e., an SEC-registered broker or dealer that is a member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) and for which a systemic risk determination to trigger the application of the OLA has been made.
In the current economic climate, security for payment is key. Although banks have started to lend money again, they remain cautious and those construction firms with weak balance sheets remain at risk of insolvency. This article discusses five pitfalls in the context of some relevant case-law and devices to protect against these.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company's Chapter 11 filing earlier this year has highlighted an issue that is well settled but sometimes overlooked: Unsecured creditors generally have no right to receive immediate payment of their legal fees from a bankrupt borrower, regardless of any contractual rights they might otherwise have absent the bankruptcy.
Bank structural reform: too big to fail, too big to save and too complex to manage, supervise and resolve? 1.1 The case for bank structural reform Bank structural reform is the result of a global financial crisis which developed in the summer of 2007 and became obvious in the EU in the latter part of 2008. The EU Member States that share an economic and monetary union (‘the Eurozone’) began to appear particularly vulnerable: the Greek sovereign debt crisis became apparent in early 2010 and serious economic problems emerged in Ireland, Portugal, Italy and Spain.
The US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) estimates that by the end of 2010, more than 300 banks will have failed, and that the cost of resolving these failures may reach $100 billion over the next four years.1
Although the Supreme Court identified three guideposts for evaluating whether a punitive award is unconstitutionally excessive 23 years ago in BMW v. Gore and refined those guideposts 16 years ago in State Farm v.
Section 506(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a creditor’s claim is a “secured claim to the extent of the value of such creditor’s interest in the estate’s interest in such property”—that is, it is a secured claim for an amount equal to the present value of the collateral—and is an “unsecured claim” for the remainder. Section 506(d) provides that, “[t]o the extent that a lien secures a claim against the debtor that is not an allowed secured claim, such lien is void.”
Doing Business in Russia 2015 Doing Business in Russia 2015 Baker & McKenzie - CIS, Limited Moscow Office White Gardens, 10th Floor 9 Lesnaya Street Moscow 125047, Russia Telephone: +7 495 787 27 00 Fax: +7 495 787 27 01 [email protected] St. Petersburg Office BolloevCenter, 2nd Floor 4A Grivtsova Lane St.
Over the last few years Spain has amended its insolvency laws to promote
out of court refinancing arrangements as a much needed alternative
to formal insolvency proceedings. The outcome of these changes,
aimed at putting Spain on a par with other EU jurisdictions, is yet to be
seen. However, what is clear is that the latest round of amendments
has substantially improved the possibility of reaching an out of court
refinancing settlement in Spain.
Historically, in relation to syndicated facilities, out of court refinancing
On 18 March 2014, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) issued Circular No. 09/2014/TT-NHNN (Circular 09) to amend and supplement a number of articles in Circular No. 02/2013/TT-NHNN regulating the classification of debt, the establishment and levels of risk reserves, and the use of reserves for dealing with risks during the operation of credit institutions and foreign bank branches.