The Sixth Circuit recently ruled that an agricultural "multi-service finance company" had no claim to the proceeds of produce held in trust pursuant to the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act ("PACA")1 and could not circumvent the security interests of a senior lender. The unpublished decision,2 which relied upon established law in the Ninth, Second, and Third Circuits (among others), serves as a reminder to financers in the agribusiness space--and beyond--of the risks inherent in lending in an uncertain economic environment.

Background

对于《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国民法典〉有关担保制度的解释》（下称“《民法典担保解释》”或“新规”）对金融资管业务的影响，我们在上篇及中篇中从担保物权受托持有、增信文件性质、上市公司对外担保、担保物权登记、抵押预告登记等角度进行了详细探析。本篇我们将从资产收益权回购交易、仲裁与申请实现担保物权程序、担保与破产衔接角度，着重介绍新规的修订及对金融资管业务的影响。择重点概括如下：

一、新规明确特定资产或资产收益权转让及回购交易中让与担保规则的处理方法

Section 546(e) of the US Bankruptcy Code, which Congress enacted to promote stability and finality in financial markets, provides a safe harbor against the avoidance of certain securities transactions. Since the safe harbor’s inclusion in the original Bankruptcy Code, Congress repeatedly has expanded its protections to a growing assortment of financial transactions involving an increasing array of parties, whose involvement in the transaction may give rise to a defense to certain avoidance actions, including constructive fraudulent transfer claims.

The COVID - 19 pandemic has had a tremendous and unprecedented impact on the global economy.To mitigate this, many governments have introduced temporary relief measures to help local businesses.

Los jueces de los juzgados mercantiles de Barcelona han publicado un conjunto de directrices básicas para la tramitación de los ‘pre-packs’ concursales españoles, introduciendo la herramienta, opcional, del “administrador silente” (‘silent administrator’). Las directrices se aprobaron en el contexto de un seminario organizado el pasado 20 de enero.

After bringing dozens of criminal charges against Paycheck Protection Program loan recipients in recent months, on January 12, the US Department of Justice announced its first civil settlement resolving allegations of PPP loan fraud.

On December 27, 2020, President Donald J. Trump signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (“CAA”) into law. The CAA was enacted in part to expand the economic stimulus relief provided by the Coronavirus, Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) signed into law six months earlier. Like the CARES Act, the CAA temporarily modifies the Bankruptcy Code to provide greater protections for debtors and certain creditors in bankruptcy.

Key Contacts:

On 18 January 2021, the Court of Appeal in Md Isa Bujang v CIMB Bank Berhad dismissed a bankrupt’s appeal against a High Court decision that struck out his claim for, inter alia, damages of RM22,445,601.64 against CIMB Bank Berhad for delay in the auction of his property charged to the Bank. The Bank was represented by our Partner, Claudia Cheah and Senior Associate, Aufa Radzi.

Key points 

Alerts and Updates

The Court’s decision provides greater certainty for creditors who passively retain estate property that they obtained pre-petition.

The Bankruptcy Protector

In City of Chicago, Illinois v. Fulton, No. 19-357, 2021 WL 125106, at *1 (U.S. Jan. 14, 2021), the United States Supreme Court considered the issue of whether the mere retention of estate property after the filing of a bankruptcy petition violates section 362(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code. Reversing the Seventh Circuit and resolving a split among the circuits, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously on January 14, 2021 “that mere retention of property does not violate the [automatic stay in] § 362(a)(3).”