ISDA is pleased at how the industry infrastructure for CDS worked in the context of the Lehman default and settlement. It also pointed out the misperceptions about the role of CDS in the financial crisis.

As previously reported, the International Insolvency Institute will hold its Ninth Annual International Insolvency Conference at Columbia University in New York on June 18 and 19, 2009. This Conference is likely to be the finest international insolvency Conference of the year and has an exceptionally talented and prominent faculty that will address today’s critical international insolvency issues and developments. Among the highlights of the Conference are the following:

From modest beginnings, the concept of Cross-Border Insolvency Protocols as a means of enhancing cooperation between administrations in international cases has become an established practice in major cases. From their origins in the International Bar Association’s Cross-Border Insolvency Concordat through the early Protocols in Maxwell Communication and Everfresh Beverages, Protocols have become a mainstay in international reorganizations and restructurings.

Clients who desire to participate in the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (“ISDA”) 2008 Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (“Lehman”) Credit Default Swap (“CDS”) Settlement Protocol (the “Settlement Protocol”) must do so by Wednesday, October 8, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. (New York time). The period to join the Settlement Protocol opens on Monday, October 6, 2008; accordingly, there is a relatively narrow window for clients to elect to participate.

Did you know that a scheme of arrangement can be used to reduce the creditor constituency in a liquidation, so that time and costs can be saved for the benefit of all parties?

The Honourable Mr. Justice Ng of the Hong Kong High Court made an Order sanctioning a scheme of arrangement (Scheme) proposed by the Joint and Several Liquidators (Liquidators) of Lehman Brothers Asia Holdings Limited (LBAH) to be implemented between LBAH and certain of its unsecured creditors (Scheme Creditors).

On a recent Mayer Brown JSM application (on behalf  of the Liquidators of one of the Lehman Brothers  entities) to reduce and expunge proofs of debt, the  Hong Kong High Court has ruled that creditors who  receive an overpayment of dividends due in respect of  a proof of debt which has been “improperly  admitted” (rule 96, Companies Winding-Up Rules)  must give credit for those overpayments before  receiving further dividends in the liquidation (Re  Lehman Brothers Commercial Corp Asia Ltd (“LBCCA”) [2014] HKEC 849) (“Proof Appl

DID YOU KNOW...that interim fees incurred by provisional liquidators (including agents’ fees), previously thought to have been payable from the funds of an insolvent estate without formal taxation, are now required to be taxed.

The SFC has applied to the High Court for an order directing Lehman Brothers Asia Ltd to comply with a SFC notice to produce certain records in connection with its investigation of the offer and marketing of Minibonds. The SFC notice required Lehman Brothers to produce to the SFC all documents relating to the assessment of Minibonds by an internal Lehman Brothers committee. Lawyers for Lehman Brothers objected to the production of certain documents on the ground that such documents were the subject of a claim of legal professional privilege.

The insolvency proceedings of the Lehman Brothers' group of companies worldwide ("Group") are among the most complicated ones we have seen. A significant factor contributing to the complexity is that many Group entities hold segregated assets (principally securities and funds) for their clients, which may be individuals or entities within or outside the Group.

Sale Hearing

On September 20, 2008, the Bankruptcy Court approved the sale of certain assets of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. ("LBHI") and Lehman Brothers Inc. ("LBI"),1 including those related to its Canadian Capital Markets and Investment Banking businesses, to Barclays Capital, Inc. ("Barclays"). The sale was approved despite the filing of over 80 objections raising a number of procedural and substantive issues. The Purchase and Sale Agreement was subsequently amended, and a clarifying letter filed, to address a number of the questions and concerns raised.