Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • Regions
      • Africa
      • Asia Pacific
      • Europe
      • North Africa/Middle East
      • North America
      • South America
    • Headlines
    • Education Resources
      • ABI Committee Articles
      • ABI Journal Articles
      • Covid 19
      • Conferences and Webinars
      • Newsletters
      • Publications
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    Creditors’ rights clarified by Interpretation II of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of the People’s Republic of China
    2013-12-16

    Understanding your rights as a creditor while navigating under China’s bankruptcy laws is becoming a must these days, especially for foreign creditors. As many foreign companies engage in business with Chinese companies, chances are likely that you will encounter a failing Chinese company that will file for bankruptcy in China. A China bankruptcy filing can have a tremendous impact upon foreign creditors.  If you are doing business with Chinese companies or have investments in Chinese companies, you should be aware of your rights as a creditor under Chinese bankruptcy laws.

    Filed under:
    China, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Intangible property
    Location:
    China
    Firm:
    Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
    Fairfield Sentry and the limits of comity in Chapter 15 cases
    2015-03-20

    Introduction

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Private Client & Offshore Services, Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, Comity, Intangible property, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    Jeffrey A. Liesemer
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered
    Terminated auto dealers revenge - were the GM/Chrysler dealer terminations unconstitutional?
    2014-05-01

    Readers may remember the dramatic restructuring of the GM and Chrysler dealer networks as part of the bankruptcy proceedings for each auto maker in 2009. The state auto dealer franchise statutes and their protection against dealer terminations were summarily preempted by the bankruptcy proceedings and the pre-condition of dealer network reduction for the necessary loans from the federal government to the debtors in possession. Dealers challenged this action in the Court of Claims, and by an April 7, 2014 decision in A&D Auto Sales, Inc. et al. v.

    Filed under:
    USA, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz PC, Bankruptcy, Personal property, Constitutionality, Intangible property, General Motors, Chrysler
    Authors:
    Joel R. Buckberg
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz PC
    Bankruptcy Appellate Panel says out-of-state member's interest in Nevada LLC is located in Nevada for venue purposes
    2013-02-14

    It sounds like the beginning of a bad joke. An individual walks into a bar and says “Where’s my LLC?” But that was the question a Bankruptcy Appellate Panel recently had to answer. The court had to determine whether Nevada was the proper venue in an involuntary bankruptcy case. The debtor’s only connection with Nevada was that his principal assets consisted of interests in a Nevada LLC and a Nevada limited partnership.

    Filed under:
    USA, Nevada, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Stoel Rives LLP, Limited liability company, Limited partnership, Intangible property, Ninth Circuit, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Stoel Rives LLP
    IRS issues guidance on outbound transfers of intangible property
    2012-08-27

    In Notice 2012-39 (the “Notice”), the IRS issued guidance announcing its intention to issue regulations with respect to certain transfers of intangible property by a U.S. corporation to a foreign corporation in a reorganization described in section 361 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”), citing significant policy concerns involving certain intellectual property transfers that permit U.S. persons to repatriate earnings without U.S. income taxation. The IRS’ position in the Notice will impact repatriation planning strategies.

    Background

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Intellectual Property, Tax, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Shareholder, Dividends, Intangible property, Internal Revenue Service (USA), Internal Revenue Code (USA)
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days