In what might prove to be an important ruling, on April 12th the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware ruled that a secured creditor had, before the debtor filed bankruptcy, properly exercised an irrevocable proxy to change the management of the debtor’s subsidiary. The Court also ruled that the creditor had not violated the automatic stay by refusing to relinquish the proxy following the bankruptcy filing. Though a clear victory for secured creditors, the Court’s ruling hinges on a well drafted proxy provision.

The Facts of the Case

A members voluntary winding up (MVWU) is implemented in circumstances where the company’s members no longer wish to retain the company’s structure because its existence is no longer required or useful. It is only available if the company in question is solvent.

A MVWU is the only way to fully wind up the affairs of a solvent company. All outstanding creditors are paid in full, and any surplus assets are distributed to its members. A MVWU also ensures that the interests of the company’s members are protected while the company structure is dismantled.

Overview/Executive Summary

In response to the recent collapse of several prominent banking institutions, Morrison Foerster conducted a brief poll to gauge how companies and their employees are faring in the wake of these historic events. Our goal is to understand how this situation has impacted these organizations, including delving into which issues and challenges, if any, will be top of mind for business leaders and their respective organizations in the weeks and months ahead.

Methodology

Key takeaways

In BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and others,¹ the UK Supreme Court considered for the first time the existence, content and triggers of the obligation on directors to have regard to the interests of creditors when a company becomes insolvent or is bordering on insolvency (the Creditor Duty).

This decision addresses important issues for directors, stakeholders, and advisors of UK companies.

Background

Statutory demands can be issued by a creditor to a debtor company to demand payment of a debt due and owing. Failure to respond to the demand may result in the debtor company facing a winding-up application based on the company’s presumed insolvency.

However, there are several avenues available to a debtor company to apply for a court order setting aside a demand. The most common grounds are found in section 459H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), where a company can claim:

If a debtor company receives a statutory demand, it has 21 days to file an application (along with a supporting affidavit) with the Court to set aside that statutory demand. The Court may set aside this statutory demand if:

There are many cases about the appointment of administrators, not so many about terminating their appointment. Re Central Properties Holdings Ltd (In Administration) [2023] EWHC 829 (Ch) is one.

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York has ruled that a creditor or trustee seeking to recover a subsequent transfer under Section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code need not obtain a judgment of avoidance against the subsequent transferee before proceeding with the recovery action.

We are increasingly seeing requests from borrowers to carve-out assets from the scope of a lender's otherwise all asset English security package. Whilst there may be commercially sensible reasons for this request, lenders should be aware of the potential impact on their enforcement rights before agreeing to this.

Recent economic challenges have triggered significant developments for household name companies in 2023.