The Bankruptcy Protector

In 2019, Congress enacted the Small Business Reorganization Act. This legislation created a new type of Chapter 11 reorganization under which certain businesses with total debts less than a certain threshold (currently $7.5 million) could reorganize. These provisions, known as Subchapter V eliminated certain requirements for confirmation of a reorganization plan and include other changes to make small business reorganization quicker and less expensive.

It was the poet John Lydgate who first said that you can please some of the people all of the time; you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Limited v Arjowiggins HKK 2 Limited [2022] HKCFA 11 (date of judgment 14 June 2022)

Introduction

Executive Summary 

Where multiple Cayman Islands entities in the same corporate structure become subject to insolvency proceedings (e.g. Cayman Islands master/ feeder fund structures), the Cayman Islands Courts will typically seek to appoint the same liquidators at each level where such entities share similarities in circumstances. Doing so typically aligns with the Overriding Objective of the Court to deal with matters economically and efficiently, and in the context of a liquidation, helps protect the interests of stakeholders in the liquidation. 

Background

As noted in our prior Alerts, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”), which became law March 27, 2020, included various COVID-19 pandemic-related bankruptcy relief provisions which sunsetted on Saturday, March 27, 2021, but were extended by the “COVID-19 Bankruptcy Relief Extension Act of 2021” (“2021 Extension Act”) through March 27, 2022. By the President’s June 21, 2022, signature of the Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment and Technical Corrections Act (the “BTATC Act”), Pub. L. No. 117-151, ___ Stat.

In a decision rendered on June 6, 2022, Justice Sotomayor authored the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in the case Siegel v. Fitzgerald, holding that a statutory increase in United States Trustee’s fees violated the “uniformity” requirement of the Bankruptcy Clause set forth in Article I, § 7, cl. 4 of the United States Constitution, which empowers Congress to establish “uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.”1  

In a recent decision, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that the sale proceeds of a property held in trust can be applied to a beneficiary’s bankruptcy obligations.

Overview

King & Ors v Kings Solutions Group Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1099 (Ch)

Background

This appeal arose in the context of long-running and complex dispute between the shareholders of Kings Solutions Group Limited (‘the Company’).