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
INTRODUCTION:
On August 12, 2021, nursery and landscaping company Moon Group of Chesapeake City, MD filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-11140). According to the petition, several affiliates are also expected to file. The company reports up to $50,000 in assets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities.
Editorial | Restructuring Directive
The Supreme Court of India (SC) in Orator Marketing Private Limited v Samtex Desinz Private Limited, Civil Appeal No. 2231 of 2021, judgment dated 26th July 2021 has held that an interest free term loan constitutes a financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
The IBC provides that a financial debt is “a debt along with interest, if any, which is disbursed against the consideration for the time value of money” furthered by an inclusive list of examples that may be considered as a financial debt.
According to the American Bankruptcy Institute, total commercial Chapter 11 filings in July 2021 decreased 62 percent from the previous year. Commercial Chapter 11 filings totaled 244 in July 2021, down from the July 2020 total of 644. Lender forbearance, continued low interest rates, and massive financial intervention by the U.S. and economies world-wide have allowed financially distressed companies to survive during the pandemic. As relief programs recede, however, we will likely see an increase in Chapter 11 filings.
Der Bundesgerichtshof hat in einer aktuellen Entscheidung seine Rechtsprechung zur Vorsatzanfechtung nach § 133 InsO neu ausgerichtet. Die Anforderungen für diesen in der Praxis äußerst relevanten Anfechtungstatbestand wurden merklich erhöht.
Der nachfolgende Beitrag soll dem Leser einen Überblick über die wesentlichen Neuerungen verschaffen.
The High Court has, for the first time since the introduction of the legislation in June 2020, refused to sanction a cross-class cram-down restructuring plan under Part 26A of the Companies Act. In In the matter of Hurricane Energy Plc [2021] EWHC 1759 (Ch), the court rejected a plan supported by bondholders because it had not been shown that the opposing shareholders had no better alternative prospects (i.e., the ‘no worse off condition’ had not been met).
Two controversial mechanisms are available in many circuits to assist parties in a chapter 11 case to reach a global resolution and obtain plan confirmation: non-consensual third-party releases and preliminary stays against third-party litigation.
On June 28, 2021, in the chapter 11 cases of Paragon Offshore plc and certain of its affiliates (“Paragon” or the “Debtors”), the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware denied the U.S. Trustee’s motion[1] to compel payment of $250,000 in statutory fees assessed against litigation trust distributions.