Chapter 15 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C § 101 et seq., which incorporates most of the provisions of the United Nations’ Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency,[1] was enacted as part of the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Chapter 15 replaced former 11 U.S.C. § 304, which was been enacted in 1978 to provide specific procedures by which a representative in a foreign bankruptcy proceeding could obtain relief in U.S. courts to facilitate the foreign bankruptcy proceeding.

On April 8, 2009, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that creates an additional hurdle for companies providing single-employer pension funds when seeking to reorganize through a bankruptcy. In general, the termination of a pension plan can give rise to a per-employee termination premium (a “Termination Premium”) owed by the company terminating the plan to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”), the quasi-governmental entity that insures pension plans.

vWe are on pace to see a record number of business bankruptcies in 2009, with a notable amount of activity in the retail, manufacturing and automotive sectors. In light of the impact of today's bankruptcies on vendors of goods, it is worthwhile to revisit one of the protections afforded to trade creditors under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA).

During the bankruptcy cycle following the recession of 2001, numerous debtors – notably airlines such as US Airways and United Air Lines, Inc. – undertook “distress terminations” of their ERISA-qualified defined benefit pension plans, which are insured by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). The PBGC found itself holding large general unsecured claims arising from significant underfunding of pension plans insured by the PBGC as a result of these terminations. Efforts by the PBGC to obtain either administrative priority or secured status for these claims invariably failed.1

The Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) purported to eliminate the ability of chapter 11 debtors in possession to pay bonuses to management through Key Employee Retention Plans. However, in recognition of the fact that a real need often exists to incentivize key employees to remain with a reorganizing or liquidating business, bankruptcy courts have approved incentive plans providing for payments to insiders and other employees. Such plans must be carefully crafted to avoid the restrictions on retention bonuses post-BAPCPA.

The dispute over the disposition of customer records held by the "Clear" airport traveler program casts a spotlight once again on the handling of consumer personal data when a business falls on hard times. In such circumstances, the desire of the debtor to preserve or maximize the value of its business assets can conflict with legitimate privacy interests of individuals who were customers of the business.

On December 2nd, the House Financial Services Committee approved the Financial Stability Improvement Act, H.R. 3996, which creates a financial risk oversight council and provides for a mechanism for winding down a systemically important non-bank financial institution facing collapse. Committee Press Release. See also Bill Summary.

After more than a decade of rising real estate values, the tide has turned against commercial and development real estate, prompting major builders and developers to commence Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. As a result of the enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) in 2005, many Chapter 11 cases that revolve around real estate will fall within the Bankruptcy Code’s definition of single asset real estate (SARE) cases and are thus subject to special provisions in the Bankruptcy Code.1 As a result, it is now time to think about SARE.

This article appeared in the Dec. 9, 2009, issue of Lodging Law newsletter.

The economic meltdown has left many hospitality development projects in a ditch, but as 2010 approaches, some hospitality real estate projects may be ripe for new life. Pursuing distressed assets may offer a tremendous upside to developers, but the unforeseen downsides can devastate the effort if they are ignored at the front end of the deal. Some of these unforeseen downsides include:

This article was featured in the March 2010 issue of The Independent Counselor.

The role of credit counseling agencies in assisting consumers in financial distress has received a lot of positive government and media attention. Before the economic crisis, the public most often heard about credit counseling only in the context of broader discussions about consumer debt and repayment alternatives or bankruptcy.