In Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, the Supreme Court of the United States resolved confusion in the lower courts over the scope and application of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), which prohibits debtors from discharging debt through bankruptcy when such debt was obtained as a result of fraudulent actions.
The new year has seen a rapid pace being set in terms of anticipated and actual legislative, regulatory and common law changes across Australia’s restructuring and insolvency regimes. The federal government’s inquiry into restructuring and bankruptcy laws is ongoing against a backdrop of sustained monetary policy interventions.
The Corporate Enforcement Authority (CEA) has recently issued an information note, which provides guidance to directors in respect of early warning tools, director's duties and restructuring processes for companies in financial difficulty.
On 23 January 2023, the Italian Income Revenue Authority (Agenzia delle Entrate) published its technical measures on the Registry of Non-Possessory Movable Pledges (the Registry) in the Official Journal. Non-possessory movable pledges are a form of security meant for entrepreneurs (and entrepreneurial entities) which – unlike regular pledges – do not imply the debtor’s dispossession.
What is now known as the ‘ipso facto regime’ was introduced by the Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Enterprise Incentives No. 2) Act 2017 in September 2017, which inserted a number of provisions that provided for a stay on the exercise of certain ipso facto contractual rights in the context of corporate restructuring and insolvency procedures.
What is an ipso facto clause?
BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA & Others [2022] UKSC 25
Factual Background
1. In December 2008 and May 2009, the directors of a UK limited company, known as Arjo Wiggins Appleton Limited (“AWA”) distributed dividends to its parent company and sole shareholder, the defendant in the claim, Sequana SA (“Sequana”). The dividend payment in May 2009 was just over £119m.
After a pause in 2022, there has been much talk of the continuation, or resumption, of a wave of retail bankruptcy cases as we begin 2023. 2022 was highlighted by Revlon’s filing (discussed here: Revlon May Signal Another Wave of Retail Bankruptcies | Retail & Consumer Products Law Observer (retailconsumerproductslaw.com)).
In the case of State Bank of India v. Moser Baer Karamachari Union & Ors., the Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) has upheld the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in the matter of State Bank of India v. Moser Baer Karamachari Union & Anr. (“Moser Baer Case”).
Die Aktienrechtsrevision brachte per 1. Januar 2023 auch verschiedene Neuerungen im Sanierungsrecht mit sich. Das Sanierungsrecht wurde dabei in gewissen Teilen präzisiert und neue Handlungspflichten wurden für den Verwaltungsrat eingeführt.
Following the important decision in Martlet Homes Ltd v Mulalley & Co Ltd [2022] (see our summary here), LDC (Portfolio One) Ltd v George Downing Construction