TGIF, right?! Before kick starting your weekend — here’s what you need to know about the recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in the chapter 11 cases of SemCrude L.P. and its debtor affiliates.

FACTS

Postpetition interest is a thorny area of bankruptcy law.  The myriad rules, coupled with the inconsistent way in which they are often applied, provide fodder for litigation and opportunity for confusion.  

The avoidance powers contained in chapter 5 of the Bankruptcy Code permit the recovery of certain prepetition “transfers” made by the debtor – either as a preference under section 547 or as a fraudulent transfer under either section 548 or state common law, made applicable under section 544 of the Bankruptcy Code.  Typically, the “tran

The recent decisions in Re MF Global UK Ltd and Re Omni Trustees Ltd give conflicting views as to whether section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 has extra-territorial effect. In this article, we look at the reasoning in the two judgments and discuss a possible further argument for extra-territorial effect.

The conflicting rulings on section 236

Rare is the decision finding that bid rigging occurred.  Recently, though, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut uncovered a bid rigging scheme in connection with the sale of property in a Canadian arrangement proceeding.  In re Sagecrest II LLC, et al., Case No. 08-50754 (Bankr. D. Conn. Dec.

Technical Knock Out (“TKO”): a boxing term used to describe a situation where one boxer is deemed the winner after knocking the other down three times.  In this case, a TKO can also be used to describe a recent ruling by the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico.

For those readers who have a sophisticated understanding of bankruptcy law, the holdings of Jester v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Jester) will not be surprising.

There are no secrets in bankruptcy, or at least only in very limited circumstances, according to a recent decision in 

In the United States Supreme Court’s plurality opinion in Hamdi v.

As the adage goes, everything old is new again.  Just like old fads coming back into style, bankruptcy issues that first arose decades ago seem to present themselves again and again over the years, albeit with a different set of facts.  Such is the case with the bankruptcy of Johns-Manville Corporation and its affiliates.  Despite Manville’s emergence from bankruptcy in 1988, questions regarding the protections of the channeling injunction issued under Manville’s chapter 11 plan continue to present themselves today.  Much to the relief of one of Manville’s insurers, in a