On March 16, 2018, a Quebec Court approved a litigation funding agreement for an insolvent company operating under court-protection in a Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceeding. The insolvent company wanted to pursue a significant claim against its primary secured creditor and the litigation funding agreement stipulated that the third party litigation funder will pay all legal fees and disbursements in relation to the proposed claim in exchange for a portion of any proceeds of the litigation.

On September 19, the Dutch District Court ruled in the first ever Dutch court case on the transfer pricing implications of a large business restructuring and confirmed the legal certainty that taxpayers can derive from thorough transfer pricing documentation. The case was litigated by the Tax Dispute Resolution group of Baker McKenzie Amsterdam.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held in Mastan v. Salamon (In re Salamon) that an undersecured creditor with a nonrecourse claim lost the right to assert a deficiency claim under section 1111(b) of the Bankruptcy Code when a senior secured creditor foreclosed on and sold its collateral during the bankruptcy case.

It has already been five years since the South African legislature introduced business rescue, a corporate restructuring procedure, which given the current economic climate is a concept that most corporates should now be familiar with. Despite its progressive intentions and increasing popularity, business rescue is often abused, usually by directors and stakeholders who have in-depth knowledge of the affairs of the company, the causes and consequences of the financial demise of the company, and who are often the initiators of the process.

A preferential transaction occurs where an insolvent person or debtor makes a transfer of property or a payment that has the effect of favouring one creditor over another. Creditors and bankruptcy trustees can use federal or provincial legislation to attack preferential transactions. A recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision, Golden Oaks Enterprises Inc v Scott, 2022 ONCA 509, upheld the finding that certain transactions were an unlawful preference under section 95(1)(b) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985 c B-3 (“BIA”).

In brief

In Chandos Construction Ltd. v. Deloitte Restructuring Inc., a decision released on October 2, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the anti-deprivation rule in the common law of Canada. The dispute in this case revolved around a construction contract between Chandos Construction Ltd. and Capital Steel Inc.

The Singapore Court of Appeal has clarified the standard of review that applies to winding-up applications where the underlying relationship between the debtor and creditor is subject to an arbitration agreement.  

The US Supreme Court has reversed the First Circuit's ruling in Mission Products (Mission Prod. Holdings v. Tempnology, LLC (In re Tempnology, LLC), 879 F.3d 389 (1st Cir. 2018)), thereby allowing the trademark licensee in that case to continue using the licensed trademark despite the debtor trademark licensor's rejection of the underlying trademark agreement in its bankruptcy case.

In brief