On November 1, 2019, certain amendments to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) will come into force and have potentially far-reaching implications on the way in which restructuring and liquidation proceedings under those statutes are conducted.

As described in further detail below, the amendments:

On November 1, 2019, reforms to Canada’s Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) that were announced in Canada’s federal 2019 budget will come into force. Key changes to the insolvency regime include:

Several new Swiss laws and amendments have entered into force as of January 1 2014. For firms doing business in Switzerland, changes in executive compensation regulation, in reorganisation proceedings and in respect to redundancy plans are among the most important ones.

The Minder initiative

In Switzerland, the preceding year was char- acterised by animated discussion on executive compensation which resulted in two mile- stone decisions on national constitutional ref-

Section 303 of the Bankruptcy Code provides a unique remedy to unsecured creditors seeking to collect their debts against an insolvent entity.  A careful look at this remedy is contained in an earlier post, entitled Creditors' Strategic Use of Involuntary Bankruptcy.  In summary, pursuant to section 303, three unsecured creditors, with claims in the aggregate of $15,775, can place an insolvent company in bankrup

Title II of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“WSRCPA”) represents Congress’ attempt to address companies considered “too big to fail.” The statute creates a new “orderly liquidation authority” (“OLA”), which allows the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) to seize control of a financial company1 whose imminent collapse is determined to threaten the financial system as a whole. Commencement of a receivership under the OLA would preempt any proceedings under the Bankruptcy Code.

On September 15, 2010, the House Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law voted 8-4 to report H.R. 4677 to the full House Judiciary Committee. Called the “Protecting Employees and Retirees in Business Bankruptcies Act of 2010,” H.R. 4677 contains several substantial changes to federal law aimed at preserving workers’ wages and benefits during a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding. The subcommittee members voted along party lines, indicating that the bill will have a difficult fight in the full committee – its fate may ultimately depend on the result of the recent election.

Over the past few days, Members of Congress have engaged in intensive debate over the terms of the bailout package, now commonly referred to as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”). Both Democrats and Republicans have offered criticisms and alternatives to the original Treasury proposal which are summarized below.

Senator Dodd Proposal

Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs has drafted a 100 page bill that encompasses many of the Democratic proposals discussed to date. His bill would:

The recent downturn in the financial sector and related bankruptcy filings have shed light on issues involving executive compensation, particularly in chapter 11 cases. Specifically, bankrupt companies often have paid substantial bonuses to executives prior to filing for bankruptcy protection and desire to retain those executives throughout the bankruptcy process through additional bonus payments and similar schemes. These types of payments have been criticized as giveaways to management.

On February 10th, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit addressed, in one opinion, two separate appeals arising from a company's Chapter 11 bankruptcy. At the outset, the Court held that a severance payment to the firm's former CEO was a fraudulent transfer. The former CEO was an insider, since he was still CEO when the severance agreement was signed, even though he was not employed when he received the actual payment. The Court held further that the company did not receive equivalent value for the severance payment.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) has approved a final rule authorizing it to clawback any compensation senior executives and directors received within two years of the FDIC being appointed receiver, if the FDIC finds they were “substantially responsible” for the failed condition of a covered financial company. Of particular concern, the rule (implementing section 210(s) of the Dodd-Frank Act):