It’s often hard to tell whether the conflict between environmental cleanup laws and bankruptcy statutes is a bug or a feature. The two seem irreconcilable when the intent of environmental laws to protect public health and safety by imposing cleanup costs on the polluter runs headlong into the Bankruptcy Code’s design to give a debtor a fresh start. Frequently, the latter prevails.
It is common for E&P companies in chapter 11 to seek to reject burdensome midstream contracts under Bankruptcy Code § 365. Rejection has not been permitted by bankruptcy courts where such agreements create enforceable covenants running with the land (“CRWL”) because a CRWL is a real property interest of the midstream gatherer, not just a contract right. Accordingly, before a debtor can seek to reject midstream agreements, the bankruptcy court must first determine whether an enforceable CRWL exists.
In the course of implementing EU directive 2019/1023 of 20 June 2019 on preventive restructuring frameworks, the German legislator intends[1], among other things, to provide for (i) a Preventive Restructuring Plan as flexible restructuring tool, (ii) further relief in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic, and to make small but important changes to the general provisions of German insolvency code.
In brief
In the latest edition of Going concerns, Stephenson Harwood's Asia restructuring and insolvency team touch on key changes in Singapore brought about by the recent Singapore Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 (and where applicable, the impact on the shipping industry), and the positions in Singapore and Hong Kong on winding up petitions vs arbitration clauses.
Content
Get to know the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 ("IRDA") Winding up petitions vs arbitration clauses (SG) The prima facie standard of review prevails
Our regular round-up of recent developments and topics for your radar, news on training and networking events for in-house counsel, and an update on our legal tech initiatives.
HIGHLIGHTS
Good afternoon.
Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the weeks of September 7 to 11 and September 14 to 18, 2020.
The past two weeks saw ten substantive decisions released by the Court of Appeal. Topics covered included bankruptcy & insolvency, contracts (freight), enforcement of letters of request by foreign courts, family law and insurance, as well as the usual procedural decisions relating to extensions of time and appellate jurisdiction.
Wishing everyone an enjoyable weekend.
On 1 December 2011 the Farm Debt Mediation Act 2011 (Vic) commenced operation. Under the Act, a farm debt mediation scheme is implemented which makes it compulsory for banks and other creditors to offer mediation to farmers before commencing debt recovery proceedings against the farmer on mortgages. Special Counsel, Jacqueline Browning discusses the scheme, which is about to mark its first anniversary of operation.
Key features
Some key features of the new Act (which in many ways mirrors similar legislation in NSW) are as follows:
Key Points:
There are various issues of which a secured creditor must be aware in seeking to either comply with its obligations or take steps to enforce a mortgage under the Act.
Victoria's new Farm Debt Mediation Act 2011 (Vic) commenced operation on 1 December 2011 and is largely modelled on the equivalent New South Wales legislation, the Farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (NSW).
Entry into force on 1 April 2009 of the new Act on the continuity of companies
The Act of 31 January 2009 on the continuity of companies (Loi relative à la continuité des enterprises/Wet betreffende de continuïteit van de ondernemingen, the "Act") entered into force on 1 April 2009.