On May 24, 2021, the U.S.

The Melbourne RIT team recently published an article on the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia in Badenoch (No 1) [2021] FCAFC 64. On 24 June 2021, the Full Court published a second judgment that fixed the start and end dates of the ‘single transaction’ between Gunns and Badenoch.

The Gunns liquidators have since made a special leave application to the High Court to appeal both of the Full Court’s decisions.

Key Note:

In a decision rendered on May 25, 2021, in Special Appeal No. 1.851.692, the Fourth Panel of the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (“STJ”) decided that the holder of a credit who is voluntarily excluded from the reorganization plan has the prerogative of deciding whether to present a proof of claim so that its credit is subject to the judicial reorganization plan or to file for individual execution after the judicial reorganization proceeding ends.

Judge Stacey Jernigan did not mince words in a recent opinion sanctioning the former CEO of Highland Capital Management, LP. Entities related to the former CEO brought suit against Highland (the debtor in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding), and sought leave from the district court to add Highland’s replacement CEO as a defendant. In Judge Jernigan’s view, such conduct violated her “gatekeeping” orders that required the bankruptcy court’s approval before “pursuing” actions against the new CEO.

Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code creates a framework through which a debtor can elect to either assume or reject an executory contract. Because the Bankruptcy Code does not define “executory,” courts utilize various tests to determine if a debtor can assume a contract—and thus be obligated to perform—or reject a contract—and thus the contract is deemed breached immediately prior to the bankruptcy filing date. The Countryman test is overwhelmingly the most commonly applied test to determine a contract’s executory nature.

This week’s TGIF looks at a recent Federal Court decision which offers guidance on when receivers may be released from claims arising out of their appointment and relieved from filing and serving formal accounts.

Key Takeaways

On August 15, 2021, Aluminum Shapes LLC, a Delair, New Jersey-based aluminum fabricator and processing company, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey (Case No. 21-16520). The company estimates $10 to $50 million in assets and liabilities.

第9回 タイの倒産手続 その１

日本では、倒産手続きとして、破産手続、民事再生手続、会社更生手続があるが、タイでは、破産手続と会社更生手続の２種類の手続がある。

今回は破産手続の概要と債権者の対応について説明する。

１ 破産手続

破産手続とは、日本の破産手続と同様、債務超過にある債務者の財産を換価し、これを適正かつ公平に債権者に配当する手続をいう。管財人が選任され、財産を換価し、届出した債権者に配当するという点では共通するが、日本の破産手続との大きな違いは、自己破産が認められていないという点である。以下、タイの破産手続の流れについて説明する。

２ 破産手続の流れ

(1) 債権者による裁判所への破産申立

In a recent judgment, the English Court of Appeal gives guidance on when a non-party costs order will be made against directors or shareholders of an insolvent company engaged in litigation. The judgment will be of interest to all involved in insolvency based litigation.

A snap shot of the courts’ jurisdiction to make costs orders against non-parties