Summary

On 9 November 2017, in a rare example of a contested recognition hearing, His Honour Judge Paul Matthews granted recognition of Agrokor’s extraordinary administration (EA) as a foreign main proceeding under the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 (CBIR).

In a corporate world where the capital structures of companies are becoming increasingly complex, schemes of arrangements under the Companies Act 2006 have established themselves as the restructuring procedure of choice for many distressed companies. This popularity is evidenced by the fact that schemes of arrangement have been increasingly used by overseas companies wishing to restructure their debts under the flexibility offered by English law.

We are increasingly being asked to advise non EU resident nationals, with cross jurisdictional lives, who wish to take advantage of the IVA regime in England & Wales.  A fairly standard scenario we see is this:

Chris Howard, Sullivan & Cromwell

This is an extract from the first edition of GRR's The Art of the Ad Hoc. The whole publication is available here. 

The relationship of an ad hoc committee with its stakeholder constituency

No power to bind: the importance of the underlying finance documents in relation to decision making

Introduction

More than ten (10) years after the enactment of Brazilian Bankruptcy Law, a uniform understanding by the Brazilian courts of several matters remains unresolved, being the application of substantive consolidation one of the most troubling.

Consolidation (procedural and material)

The ability to avoid fraudulent or preferential transfers is a fundamental part of U.S. bankruptcy law. However, when a transfer by a U.S. entity takes place outside the U.S. to a non-U.S. transferee—as is increasingly common in the global economy—courts disagree as to whether the Bankruptcy Code’s avoidance provisions can apply extraterritorially to avoid the transfer and recover the transferred assets. A ruling recently handed down by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York widens a rift among the courts on this issue. In Spizz v. Goldfarb Seligman & Co.

Globalization has led to a marked increase in international components to insolvency proceedings. Cross-border issues add a new layer of complexity to what is often a situation already fraught with obstacles. Courts and practitioners alike face additional difficulties communicating with other courts, resolving issues consistently in jurisdictions with different laws and policy objectives, and enforcing rulings and implementing orders adjudicated extraterritorially.

TRANSACTIONAL

May 2, 2017

Bankruptcy and Financial Restructuring Alert

Coming to America?--Applying Bankruptcy Code Section 109(a) to Vet Foreign Companies Filing US Bankruptcy Cases Under Chapter 15

By Andrew N. Goldman, Benjamin W. Loveland and Lauren R. Lifland

I. Introduction

THE RULING: CHAPTER 15 DEBTORS CAN ASSERT AVOIDANCE ACTIONS UNDER STATE LAW