The court-supervised reorganization of corporations introduced by Law 11101/05 (the Brazilian Reorganization and Bankruptcy Law - "LRF" in the Portuguese acronym) arose as one of the changes needed to lower credit risk and achieve greater reductions in interests accrued on financial loans. However, little has been said about the fact that the LRF has introduced several capital market protection mechanisms, which we will discuss in this article.
Although in some jurisdictions arbitration is a long-established form of alternative dispute resolution, this mechanism has only recently been regulated in Brazil. The Brazilian Commercial Code, enacted in 1850, already included a few sparse provisions regarding commercial arbitration, but there were no references to specific rules. It was not until 1996 that Brazil passed its first specific arbitration statute, Law No. 9,307/96 (Arbitration Law).
The Superior Court of Justice (Superior Tribunal de Justiça - STJ) judged Direct Appeal n. 1.223.792 where the State of Mato Grosso do Sul sought to include the delay penalty in the classification of the credits in the bankruptcy of a company. According to the opinion announced by the Second Panel, in the case of bankruptcy declared during the validity term of Law n.
- In Irving H. Picard v Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, BVIHCV 0140/2010, the trustee appointed in the liquidation of the business of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (“Picard” and “BLMIS”) sought, amongst other things, (i) recognition in the BVI as a foreign representative; (ii) an entitlement to apply to the BVI Court for orders in aid of the foreign proceeding; and (iii) an entitlement to require any person to deliver up to him any property of BLMIS.
- Bannister J.
On 15 September 20091 the judge responsible for the Lehman bankruptcy proceedings in the United States held that Metavante Corporation (“Metavante”) could not rely on Section 2(a)(iii) of the ISDA Master Agreement to suspend payments to Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc. (“LBSF”). Specifically, Judge Peck held that the safe harbour provisions in the US bankruptcy code protected a non-defaulting party’s contractual rights to liquidate, terminate or accelerate swaps and to net termination values but did not provide a basis to withhold performance under a swap if it did not terminate.
A number of changes have been made to insolvency procedure to remove various discrepancies and controversial practices:
Original Newsletter(s) this article was published in: Commercial Litigation Update: April 2020
The COVID-19 pandemic is, first and foremost, a human and health crisis. Social and physical distancing has been the almost universal response to this pandemic. The effect of social distancing on the economy, however, is significant.
Good afternoon.
Please find below our summaries of this past week’s civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. Topics covered included insurance broker negligence, zoning (use) bylaw enforcement, the wrongful termination of a commercial lease and the automatic right of appeal of bankruptcy orders.
On March 6, 2020, the Ontario Court of Appeal (the “OCA”) released its decision in Royal Bank of Canada v. Bodanis (“Bodanis”),1 holding that two debtors, each having an estate exceeding $10,000 in value, had appeals of their bankruptcy orders as of right under section 193 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act2(the “BIA”) and thus did not need to seek leave to appeal.
Section 193 reads as follows:
Whether a former spouse's pension can be shared after bankruptcy depends entirely on where he or she lives
Resolving the way a separated couple’s property is dealt with can be complicated, but it gets even more complex if one of the spouses declares bankruptcy after separation.