On February 3, 2022, as part of a series of recent decisions addressing third-party releases, Bankruptcy Judge John T.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion that potentially broadens the proximate cause element of claims brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). RICO’s proximate cause element requires a plaintiff to allege facts plausibly establishing that there is a “direct relationship” between the claimed injury and the defendant’s conduct in violation of RICO.
The Economic Survey prepared by the Economic Division, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India is an annual performance report of the Country’s economy which focuses on the economic developments in the country of each and every sector and helps in better utilization of resources and their allocation in the Union Budget. The Economic Survey is presented before the Budget and the theme of Economic Survey 2021-22, relates to the art and science of policymaking under conditions of extreme uncertainty.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) was enacted to revamp the insolvency and bankruptcy laws and resolve problems being faced by creditors due to non-repayment of outstanding dues by corporate borrowers. Since our 2020 snapshot on 15 key developments in insolvency law, the Code has been further refined and amended in line with the object of the Code and taking into account the COVID 19 pandemic. The insolvency courts have also played their part in the development of the Code considering the business realities and practical considerations.
The proper tax treatment of real property disposals is a common area of dispute between taxpayers and the Inland Revenue Board (Revenue). Taxpayers who have disposed of investment properties expect to be taxed under the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 (RPGTA). The Revenue, on its part, may disagree, taking the view that the taxpayer had been trading and ought to be taxed (at the higher rate) under the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA).
The Insolvency Service now has extended powers when it comes to directors dissolving companies to avoid paying their liabilities.
These powers have been granted under the Rating (Coronavirus) and Directors Disqualification (Dissolved Companies) Act, which was given royal assent on 15 December 2021.
This week’s TGIF considers the decision in Re BBY Limited (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (in liq) [2022] NSWSC 29, where the Court discussed the necessary elements of a Quistclose trust in the context of alleged unfair preferences.
Key Takeaways
The Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) recently held that merely freezing a debtor’s bank account holding funds that had been garnished by a judgment creditor did not violate the automatic stay. This decision was based on the United States Supreme Court’s ruling last year in City of Chicago v. Fulton, holding that retention of repossessed vehicles that were possessed before a bankruptcy was filed did not violate the automatic stay.
“[E]nsnared between his involvement in a business that is legal under the laws of Arizona but illegal under federal law,” one debtor’s chapter 13 petition was recently dismissed due to his undisputed violations of the Controlled Substances Act.
After a lawsuit filed by liquidators of a company that collapsed against the company’s former officers, directors, and independent auditors was dismissed in limine, a new Israeli Supreme Court ruling overturned that decision and allowed the liquidators to move forward with the lawsuit, alleging that lack of oversight was what led to the company’s collapse.