The claimant and defendant both lent money to a company (Y) under a credit facility. Y’s financial position deteriorated, the parties appointed investigating accountants and put Y into “workout”. Following an assignment of Y’s indebtedness to the claimant to the defendant’s subsidiary, the claimant brought proceedings against the defendant for breach of an anti-claim clause in the assignment.
In response to the global outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), governments in many countries have issued emergency legislation to mitigate the impact of the pandemic on companies’ day-to-day operations. Since March 24, 2020, the Indian government has been announcing various measures aimed to ease corporate and tax compliance for companies doing business in India, as well as other measures pertaining to employment and bankruptcy matters. Below is a high-level overview of some of the most relevant aspects of these measures as they pertain to India subsidiaries of US companies.
An insight into the key issues and challenges facing global infrastructure projects, and a look at possible solutions and mitigations.
In brief
The Third Circuit recently held, in a case from the Energy Future Holdings bankruptcy, that a losing stalking horse bidder can provide sufficient value to the debtor’s estate to receive an administrative claim for a break-up fee and expenses. In re Energy Future Holdings Corp., 990 F.3d 728, 748 (3rd Cir. 2021). This represents an expansive view of potential administrative claims related to those costs, providing bidders significant potential protections for their bids.
“A … transferee [who] received fraudulent transfers with actual knowledge or inquiry notice of fraud or insolvency” loses any “good faith” defense available under the Texas version of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“TUFTA”), held the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Jan. 9, 2019. Janvey v. GMAG LLC, 2019 WL 141107, *3 (5th Cir. Jan. 9, 2019) (emphasis added).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, on Aug. 16, 2011, affirmed the lower court’s decision authorizing reimbursement of expenses to qualified bidders for a reorganization debtor’s assets. In re Asarco, LLC, 2011 BL 213002 (5th Cir. Aug. 16, 2011). In the court’s view, the debtor provided “a compelling and sound business justification for the reimbursement authority.” Id. at *12.
Facts
After holding a hearing on the topic this past July, the Congressional Oversight Panel (COP) released a report earlier this week entitled, “The Use of TARP Funds in Support and Reorganization of the Domestic Automotive Industry,” examining how TARP funds have been used to support and reorganize both
In an order dated May 7, 2009, Judge Arthur Gonzales approved Chrysler’s proposed bidding procedures for the sale of substantially all of the Company’s assets to a newly formed entity that would continue business under Chrysler’s name.
Today, HM Treasury announced the conclusion of discussions with Lloyds Banking Group (Lloyds) and Royal Bank of Scotland Plc (RBS), regarding their participation in the U.K.
In this article we look at current trends and developments at the intersection between insolvency and dispute resolution, including a rundown of some of the latest legislative changes, and issues to consider when litigating against parties in financial distress.
This analysis was first published on Lexis®PSL on 27 September 2021 and is republished with their kind permission.
Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020