On March 14, 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (the “Fifth Circuit”) revisited the issue of the rejection of filed-rate contracts in bankruptcy where such contracts are governed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). The ruling marks the first time the Fifth Circuit has addressed this issue since its 2004 decision in In re Mirant Corp.¹ In Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v.

“the new restructuring officer regime and the other amendments to the Companies Act … address certain of the challenging issues previously experienced by practitioners with the restructuring provisional liquidation regime”

Introduction

The Cayman Islands continues to be at the forefront of developments in restructuring and insolvency law in the offshore world and one of the premier jurisdictions of choice to facilitate complex and high-value cross-border restructurings.  

In a few months, Justice Stephen G. Breyer is set to retire from the U.S. Supreme Court.

The bankruptcy world will miss him.

The reason for discussing this subject now (instead of waiting for the retirement to actually happen) is this:

• The triumph of Justice Breyer’s Footnote 2 in Merit Management, as accomplished by a denial of certiorari on 2/22/2022.

What follows is a summary of four important Supreme Court bankruptcy opinions in which Justice Breyer played a significant role—starting with the Footnote 2 opinion.

Customers of Amigo loans will have the opportunity to vote at creditor meetings in relation to two alternative scheme proposals, following its recent leave to convene hearing. In a judgment handed down on 15 March, the court gave leave to convene simultaneous creditors' meetings in relation to two schemes - termed the "New Business Scheme" and the "Wind-Down Scheme".

The situation, which is already unpleasant in itself for a shareholder of a bankrupt company, becomes really annoying in many cases due to the insolvency administrator's right to challenge insolvency under sections 129 et spp. InsO, the situation becomes really annoying in many cases. It is particularly annoying if the shareholder has provided security for the claim of a company creditor for the repayment of a loan and is claimed by the insolvency administrator under sections 143 (3) and 135 InsO (shareholder loan) despite the fact that the company has already repaid the loan.

In a recent decision,¹ the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the 9th Circuit clarified an important step that construction lienholders must take to perfect their liens when the debtor has filed a bankruptcy petition before the lienholder files a foreclosure lawsuit.

The High Court has provided useful guidance on the interplay between the JCT regime for payment and claims in insolvency proceedings, in the recent case of Levi Solicitors LLP v Wilson and another [2022] EWHC 24 (Ch).

The application

The following 6 cases have been reported in our Bankruptcy & Insolvency practice area:

Walton v ACN 004 410 833 Ltd (formerly Arrium Ltd) (in liq) — Insolvency | High Court upholds shareholders’ application for examination summons

INTRODUCTION 今回のニュースレターでは、2022 年 2 ⽉の破産倒産法関連の主なアップデートについて取り扱ってい ます。最⾼裁判所（＝SC）、会社法上訴審判所（＝NCLAT）、会社法審判所（＝NCLT）にて下された 重要な判決についてまとめました。 1) NCLT CAN ENTERTAIN PETITION RELATED TO PERSONAL GUARANTEES OF CORPORATE DEBTOR, EVEN IF THE CORPORATE DEBTOR WAS ADMITTED INTO CORPORATE INSOLVENCY RESOLUTION PROCESS AND RESOLUTION PLAN IS APPROVED Matter: State Bank of India v. Savita Gowda Order date: 20 January 2022 Summary: Sharon Bio-Medicine Ltd. （＝Sharon Bio-Med）に対して会社破産処理⼿続（＝CIRP）が開始され、 NCLT にて再建計画が承認されました。

The corporate attribution doctrine concerns the attribution of the actions of a corporation’s directing mind to the corporation itself. On March 10, 2022, in Ernst & Young Inc. v. Aquino [Aquino], the Court of Appeal released what it described as a decision of first impression in which the Court considered the doctrine in the bankruptcy and insolvency context.