Insolvency proceedings are typically launched by an administrator or liquidator during an insolvency process. The nature of modern insolvency litigation, including the market for assigning causes of action to third parties, has somewhat muddied the waters on how and where to commence proceedings. Two recent cases provide some valuable insight into the High Court’s approach.
On September 8, 2021, A.B.C. Carpet Co., Inc., dba ABC Carpet & Home, along with two affiliates, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Lead Case No. 21-11591). ABC Carpet & Home is a New York City-based luxury furniture retailer. The company estimates $10 to $50 million in assets and $50 to $100 million in liabilities.
In a relationship between a creditor and debtor, the issue of liability is always a cause of concern. This is made even more apparent when there is more than one debtor involved as the terms of liability is not necessarily clear. Among the popular issues of contention is whether the debtors’ liability is joint or joint and several. In this commentary, we will explore this artificial distinction through the recent Federal Court case of Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja v. Edwin Cassian Nagappan @ Marie [2021] 1 LNS 928.
In the recent decision of Paragon Offshore, No. 16-10386 (CSS), 2021 (Bankr. D. Del. June 28, 2021), the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the court) addressed the issue of whether the Office of the United States Trustee (OUST) could collect its quarterly fees against assets that were previously transferred to a litigation trust (the litigation trust) free and clear of any and all claims, liens and other encumbrances pursuant to a confirmed plan of liquidation.
Johnson & Johnson currently has approximately 25,000 lawsuits pending against it related to its talc products, including talcum powder and baby powder
On 2 August 2021, Treasury released a consultation paper on proposed reforms to improve creditors’ schemes of arrangement in Australia. The proposed reforms are intended to complement the simplified liquidation and debt restructuring process introduced for small businesses on 1 January 2021, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
What is a scheme of arrangement?
Current U.S. bankruptcy law gives companies wide discretion to file a bankruptcy in the venue of their choice. A company can file for bankruptcy in any federal district where it has its “domicile, residence, principal place of business in the United States, or principal assets in the United States” or where an affiliate of the company has a pending bankruptcy case. Often a company whose business primarily is in California will file bankruptcy in another state where it might have a small corporate affiliate.
In June 2020, the "Anti-Crisis Shield 4.0" introduced a simplified form of restructuring proceeding into Polish law. This modified version of the procedure ushered in significant improvements for debtors, including a moratorium on enforcement action and four months to seek the consent of creditors to restructuring proposals, and to seek the approval of the arrangement with the court.
In May 2021, a landmark co-operation mechanism was implemented between Hong Kong and Mainland China in cross-border insolvency matters.
Liquidators from Hong Kong can now apply to the courts in three Mainland "pilot cities" (ie Shanghai, Shenzhen and Xiamen) for recognition and assistance, provided that:
The German Code for Restructuring and Insolvency Law Development (SanInsFoG) came into force in early 2021, resulting in significant changes to the Insolvency Code. The changes impact both self-administration proceedings (where the debtor retains possession and control of its assets in insolvency proceedings, usually to implement a restructuring) and protective shield proceedings (where the debtor develops an insolvency plan). The requirements for self-administration proceedings have become stricter.
Liquidity forecast