Retired U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Gerber once observed that “issues as to the interplay between environmental law and bankruptcy are among the thorniest on the litigation map.” Difficulties navigating this interplay largely stem from the inherent conflict between the goals of bankruptcy and environmental laws, with the former aimed at providing debtors with a fresh start, while the latter cast a broad net to hold parties (even some innocent parties) responsible for past harm to the environment.
When a company that has been designated a responsible party for environmental cleanup costs files for bankruptcy protection, the ramifications of the filing are not limited to a determination of whether the remediation costs are dischargeable claims. Another important issue is the circumstances under which contribution claims asserted by parties coliable with the debtor will be allowed or disallowed in the bankruptcy case. This question was the subject of rulings handed down early in 2011 by the New York bankruptcy court presiding over the chapter 11 cases of Lyondell Chemical Co.
The offshore industry is thriving but ESG is adding new priorities both to transactions and to the way firms are being run, according to a new report by Reports Legal featuring Ogier's global managing partner Edward Mackereth.
With record deal activity across service lines this year, Ogier has been busier than ever in the past 12 months.
"Corporate has had a stellar year with all the M&A transactions and SPACs," said Edward.
Victoria's Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the risk that a disclaimer of property may be set aside where the liquidators are indemnified, and the need for liquidators to be mindful where the company holds contaminated property.
Liquidators have more certainty about their ability to disclaim the environmental liabilities and responsibilities of a company in liquidation.
The liquidators were not bound to cause Linc to comply with the EPO from the date of the disclaimer.
Two courts recently answered “yes,” finding that environmental claims brought against reorganized debtors by government entities were discharged under confirmed Chapter 11 plans of reorganization. In In re Exide Techs., 613 B.R. 79 (D. Del. 2020), the District of Delaware held that pre-petition, non-compensatory air quality penalties imposed on a Chapter 11 debtor by a state regulator were subject to discharge in bankruptcy. And in In re Peabody Energy Corp.
I.Exide Techs.: the Bankruptcy Code’s Exceptions to Dischargeability
Actualidad Normativa Coordinadora: Rosana Hallett Of counsel de GA_P N .º 212017 2 © Gómez-Acebo & Pombo Abogados, 2017. Todos los derechos reservados. Advertencia legal: Este boletín sólo contiene información general y no se refiere a un supuesto en particular. Su contenido no se puede considerar en ningún caso recomendación o asesoramiento legal sobre cuestión alguna. N.
Current Legislation Coordinator: Rosana Hallett Of counsel of GA_P No . 212017 Current Legislation No . 21 | 2017 2 © Gómez-Acebo & Pombo Abogados, 2017. All rights reserved Disclaimer: This digest is provided for general information purposes only and nothing expressed herein should be construed as legal advice or recommendation. Design and layout: José Á. Rodríguez and Ángela Brea • Translation and adaptation: John Woodger Contents I. Environment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I. Medio ambiente En materia medioambiental destacamos la aprobación de las siguientes normas en estos últimos meses: 1. La Ley 11/2014, de 3 de julio, por la que se modifica la Ley 26/2007, de 23 de octubre, de Responsabilidad Medioambiental. Tiene por objeto adaptar la actual normativa en materia de responsabilidad ambiental para adecuarla a lo regulado por la Directiva 2013/30/UE, del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 12 de junio del 2013.