In years past defaulting lender mechanics in a subscription credit facility may have been viewed as boiler plate language and, in most cases, the relevant provisions have not received much attention. In light of recent events in the banking industry, defaulting lender provisions have gained some renewed attention. In this article we take a look at the current general state of defaulting lender provisions and the impacts on the lender and borrower.

The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA) has confirmed a Court of Appeal finding that the court should respect the effect of an exclusive jurisdiction clause in bankruptcy proceedings, just as it does in ordinary civil actions.

Die Giesserei Schmidt GmbH & Co. KG kann den Betrieb fortsetzen. Für den Cuxhavener Traditionsbetrieb wurde ein Investor gefunden, der den Betrieb vollständig und unter Erhaltung aller 57 Arbeitsplätze übernimmt. Zugleich übernimmt der bisherige Betriebsleiter Peter Heinze die Geschäftsführung.

Bei dem Investor handelt es sich um Jens Jäger, der über eine umfangreiche Erfahrung in der Sanierung von Unternehmen verfügt. Jäger sieht erhebliches Potential in beiden Gießereistandorten und plant umfangreiche Investitionen sowie Neueinstellungen.

The foundry Schmidt GmbH & Co. KG can continue operations. An investor has been found for the traditional Cuxhaven-based company, who will take over the business in its entirety while retaining all 57 jobs. At the same time, the previous plant manager Peter Heinze will take over the management.

The investor is Jens Jäger, who has extensive experience in turning around companies. Jäger sees considerable potential in both foundry sites and plans extensive investments as well as new hires.

Introduction

Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code is one of the most important and well-known statutes to bankruptcy practitioners. This section of the Bankruptcy Code protects a good faith asset purchaser who purchases assets from a debtor’s bankruptcy estate from having the sale unwound when the sale (or an aspect of the sale) is challenged by an appeal.

“within three (3) business days of termination of the mediation, the Debtors shall publicly disclose the terms of the last offers extended by each of the Mediation Parties, respectively.”[Fn. 1]

Say what!?

Whoever heard of such a thing—a requirement that the “last offers” of the mediating parties be publicly disclosed?

And this requirement is in a “consensual” mediation order entered in the Genesis Global Holdco, LLC, bankruptcy.[Fn. 2]

Context

Here’s the context.[Fn. 3]

On April 17, 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Matter of RE Palm Springs II, L.L.C., 2023 WL 2966520 (5th Cir. April 17, 2023), held that a senior lender who uses economic leverage and asserts its legal rights to squeeze out a junior lender remains a good faith purchaser entitled to declare an appeal moot based on a sale under section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code. Key to the Fifth Circuit’s opinion was the fact that the actions in question were disclosed to the bankruptcy court in advance of it making the section 363(m) finding.

Facts

Congress passed the operative texts without noticeable fanfare. From its enactment to today, section 363(k) has entitled a secured creditor to “credit bid” the full amount of the debt owed by a debtor in any sale of the underlying collateral pursuant to section 363(b). That this statutory bequest elicited little debate made imminent sense, for Congress had thereby codified one of secured creditors’ seemingly time-honored rights.

The High Court refused to sanction the restructuring plan put forward by Nasmyth Group Limited (Nasmyth) pursuant to Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 on 28 April 2023, despite both statutory conditions for cross-class cram down having been met.

Meanwhile, judgment is awaited in respect of the restructuring plan put forward by The Great Annual Savings Company Limited (GAS), which was proceeding simultaneously to Nasmyth and which also seeks to cram down HMRC.