Remember the old saying, “Grab what you can get, when you can get it”?
Well . . . that old saying is now the federal law of the land, applying exclusively to bankruptcy laws in Alabama and North Carolina.
Here’s how. Congress imposed bankruptcy fee increases on Chapter 11 debtors in every state and territory of these United States, other than Alabama and North Carolina. As to similar fees in Alabama and North Carolina, the U.S. Supreme Court recently observed:
In Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC v. Mallinckrodt PLC,1 the United States District Court for the District of Delaware ruled that a debtor that purchased intellectual property under a prepetition asset purchase agreement could continue to retain and use the property post-confirmation while discharging its obligations to pay any future royalties otherwise owed. The decision highlights the importance of structuring transactions up-front to minimize the consequences of future bankruptcies.
Background
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has released guidance to its attorneys regarding requests to discharge student loans in bankruptcy cases.
At a time when, globally, insured businesses are under severe financial strain, the availability and extent of their insurance assets take on a new significance. It is significant not just for troubled businesses and their insurers, but also for third parties with potential or actual claims against those businesses.
Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers a case that shows the courts’ reluctance to expand the jurisdiction of equity to award compound interest in common law claims.
A majority of the Supreme Court recently held that an insolvent company does not suffer any recoverable loss if payments are made from its bank accounts that discharge a debt owed by that company. This decision adds to the growing case law on the Quincecare duty.
The claim against HSBC
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) was introduced as a one stop solution for resolving insolvencies, which previously was a long-drawn process that did not offer an economically viable arrangement. In 2022, the Indian courts have been guided by the principal of ‘resolution of insolvency of debtor’ over ‘recovery by creditors’ and have refused insolvency applications where they found such application were for recovery of money rather for insolvency of the debtor.
Last November we wrote about the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Highland Capital Management, L.P., where the court reversed the bankruptcy court’s approval of a plan’s exculpation clause for non-debtors and limited the universe of parties covered by that provision. Relying on Bank of New York Trust Co., NA v. Official Unsecured Creditors’ Comm.
When deciding the amount of homestead exemption to which a debtor is entitled, should a bankruptcy court apply the state exemption in effect on the creation date of the lien or on the bankruptcy filing date? According to the Ninth Circuit in a recent decision, the court should apply the state exemption law in effect on the filing date of the bankruptcy petition.
January, 2023 For Private Circulation - Educational & Informational Purpose Only Between the lines... A BRIEFING ON LEGAL MATTERS OF CURRENT INTEREST KEY HIGHLIGHTS ⁎ Delhi High Court: Invoking CIRP would not make the dispute non-arbitrable. ⁎ NCLAT: Section 96(1)(b) of the IBC does not stay any future liability or obligation. ⁎ NCLAT: The IBC does not provide for any look-back period on how far back fraudulent transactions can be investigated. ⁎ The changing contours of employment law in India. January, 2023 http://www.vaishlaw.com/ I.