Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, adopted in all fifty states plus the District of Columbia with relatively few variations, sets out, among other things, the rules to be followed when obtaining a security interest in personal property collateral to secure a loan. The basic premise of Article 9 is that if the lender follows the rules, it should be protected against third parties, including other creditors or a bankruptcy trustee, who would seek to challenge the lender’s security interest or the priority of the security interest.
The Bankruptcy Protector
The Bankruptcy Protector
Most bankruptcy practitioners are familiar with the intentionally broad scope of discovery under Bankruptcy Rule 2004. However, there are limits to this discovery and the “pending proceeding” rule can be a useful tool to limit the scope of discovery in the appropriate circumstances.
Bankruptcy Rule 2004
Judge Craig Whitley’s recent transfer of the LTL Management case will bring a high-profile "Texas Two-Step" chapter 11 bankruptcy to New Jersey, and it may open a new chapter in how courts approach the novel transaction designed to isolate and address certain mass-tort liabilities.
In its much-discussed decision, City of Chicago v. Fulton, 141 S. Ct. 585 (2020), the Supreme Court ruled that the City of Chicago (“City”) was not in violation of Section 362(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code for failing to release an impounded car to a debtor in bankruptcy.
Debtor's Right to Consensual Sale of Seized Property
On Tuesday, November 30, 2021, the Law numbered 7343 on the Amendment of Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code and Some Other Codes were promulgated in the Official Gazette numbered 31675 and entered into force on the date of promulgation in accordance with Article 5 of the same code.
Although several changes have been made regarding mentioned code, in the compulsory enforcement system for the first time. The debtor is authorized to consensually sell the seized property.
5. Yargı Paketi kapsamında 30.11.2021 tarih ve 31675 sayılı Resmî Gazete’de yayımlanarak yürürlüğe giren 7343 sayılı İcra ve İflas Kanunu ile Bazı Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılması Hakkında Kanun (“7343 sayılı Kanun”) ile, 4721 sayılı Türk Medeni Kanunu ve 5395 sayılı Çocuk Koruma Kanunu gibi diğer kanunların yanı sıra, 2004 sayılı İcra ve İflas Kanunu’nda (“İİK”) pek çok önemli değişiklik yapılmıştır.
The Law Amending the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law and Certain Other Laws No. 7343 (“AmendmentLaw”), known as the 5th Judicial Reform Package, which entered into force upon publication in the Official Gazette (31675) dated November 30th, 2021, introduced several important changes to the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (“Law No. 2004”), as well as Turkish Civil Law No. 4721 and Child Protection Law No. 5395.
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN DEBT ENFORCEMENT AND BANKRUPTCY LAW
The proposal on the Law Regarding Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code and the Amendment of Certain Laws, which is also called the fifth judicial package, was accepted by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. The Law was published in the Official Gazette on 30.11.2021 and entered into force with its publication. The regulations and innovations made in the Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code No. 2004 (“DEBC”) are as follows:
İCRA İFLAS HUKUKUNDA ÖNEMLİ DEĞİŞİKLİKLER
Beşinci yargı paketi olarak adlandırılan İcra ve İflas Kanunu ile Bazı Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılması Hakkındaki Kanun Teklifi, Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi tarafından kabul edilmiştir. Kanun, 30.11.2021 tarihinde Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanmış ve yayımıyla birlikte yürürlüğe girmiştir. 2004 sayılı İcra İflas Kanunu’nda (“İİK”) yapılan düzenlemeler ve yenilikler şu şekildedir: