In Bechara v Bates,^[1] the Full Federal Court reminds us of the proper procedure for review of a sequestration order made by a registrar. This case raises an important point about bankruptcy practice and procedure in the Federal Circuit Court and the Federal Court.

In Dr. Thomas Markusic et al. v. Michael Blum et al. memorandum opinion 200818, the Delaware Chancery Court (the “Court”) declined to extend the Gentile doctrine. In so doing, the Court held that the counterclaims attempting to rely on it had to be dismissed.

The COVID-19 pandemic shook the global real estate and hospitality industry as lockdowns were put in place across the globe. The sudden and unexpected lack of footfall caused revenues in physical centers such as restaurants, shopping malls and hotels to plummet, compounding existing structural inefficiencies and accelerating the speed of change for many businesses.

Un Juzgado de lo Mercantil aprueba, por primera vez, la modificación de un convenio concursal al amparo de la normativa de medidas procesales y organizativas para hacer frente al COVID-19 en el ámbito de la administración de justicia.

Introduction

Almost everyone knows the tale of Kodak. After over 100 years of market dominance in film and camera production, it was forced into bankruptcy in 2012 after Kodak’s management failed to understand the threat of digital photography on their business.

A similar story befell Blockbuster. A market leader in the late 1990s, by 2010 its business was in tatters as Netflix and online streaming soared in popularity.

Foreign judgments may be utilized in Mexico either: 1) as evidence, 2) as a binding resolution, or 3) as a resolution to be enforced. In the first case, the foreign resolution is utilized as evidence of facts but not of law, in the second as evidence of law (res judicata), and in the third as a resolution to be enforced.

In the recent opinion In re PT Bakrie Telecom TBK, 2021 WL 1439953, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York provided some further guidance on what constitutes a “collective proceeding” for purposes of achieving recognition of a foreign proceeding under Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code. This post will address the collective nature of the proceeding at issue. In a future post we will address other important elements of Judge Lane’s decision.

Today Ukraine continues to undergo the reform of the bankruptcy system, aimed at improving the business environment and increasing the investment attractiveness of the country. The bankruptcy proceeding seems like a major challenge for a creditor, as it is usually a tedious and time-consuming process. In order to speed it up and make it more efficient, the Bankruptcy Code of Ukraine was adopted in 2019 (hereinafter — the “Code”). One of the objectives of the Code is to satisfy creditors’ claims. But it also aims to protect debtors’ rights.

The Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas dismissed the National Rifle Association’s (“NRA”) bankruptcy case on May 11, finding that the case was not filed in good faith. In his opinion, Judge Harlin Hale found that there was cause for dismissal because the case was filed “to gain unfair litigation advantage and … to avoid a state regulatory scheme,” neither of which he considered to be a purpose intended or sanctioned by the Bankruptcy Code.