Since PROMESA was enacted in 2016 to pave the way for a comprehensive restructuring of Puerto Rico’s mounting municipal debt obligations, the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico (District Court) has become a haven for litigious groups of creditors and other constituencies. Undoubtedly frustrated with the progress and trajectory of the cases of the commonwealth and its subsidiaries, these groups have mounted a number of complex legal attacks to the efficacy and validity of PROMESA. However, the debtors recently secured a significant win in Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd.
The ability of a bankruptcy trustee or a chapter 11 debtor-in-possession ("DIP") to use "cash collateral" during the course of a bankruptcy case may be vital to the debtor's prospects for a successful reorganization. However, because of the unique nature of cash collateral, the Bankruptcy Code sets forth special rules that apply to the nonconsensual use of such collateral to protect the interests of the secured creditor involved. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Washington examined these requirements in In re Claar Cellars, LLC, 2020 WL 1238924 (Bankr. E.D.
In the recent case of Dwyer & Ors and Davies & Ors v Chicago Boot Co Pty Ltd [2011] SASC 27, Chicago Boot claimed that certain payments made to it by two insolvent companies were not unfair preference payments, because of, amongst other defences, the purported application of a retention of title clause in relation to the supply of goods by Chicago Boot.
As we reported in a client mailshot earlier this week, the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court has made important amendment to its rules. The amendments are immediately in force and deal with a number of areas including appeal procedure, costs capping and costs orders.
On November 14, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered three decisions on the application of the the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c. B-3 (BIA) and its interaction with certain provincial statutes.
OVERVIEW OF THE FACTS
On November 1 2007 the State Commission for Insolvency presented the Preliminary Bill for an Insolvency Act to the minister of justice. The bill contains rules for the recognition of insolvency proceedings in non-EU countries and the law applicable to foreign proceedings. This update examines those rules and their relationship to the EU Insolvency Regulation and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency.
Case Law
On March 8, 2011, France's highest court, the Cour de cassation, confirmed that CMBS borrower, Heart of la Défense SAS (Hold), and its Luxembourg parent company, Dame Luxembourg Sarl (Dame), were entitled to Court protection in France under Safeguard Proceedings (sauvegarde). Safeguard is a French bankruptcy process that resembles the U.S. Chapter 11 debtor-in-possession procedures, used most recently (and notably) in connection with the bankruptcies of General Motors and Lehman Brothers.
The Supreme Court has ruled that some family trust structures will be ineffective in protecting assets from claims by former partners and, potentially, other creditors.
The decision in Clayton v Clayton has implications for everyone who establishes trusts to manage relationship property, estate planning and insolvency risk.
The facts
The Supreme Court, in a judgment released last Friday,1 has overruled the Court of Appeal by deciding that the IRD stands behind liquidators and employees when cash is available in liquidation and PAYE is owed.
This decision, which upholds the payment waterfall in Schedule 7 of the Companies Act, will be welcomed by insolvency practitioners after the Court of Appeal had upset previous industry practice.
Context
The Supreme Court has affirmed the Court of Appeal’s finding in August of this year that a voluntary administrator may only use a casting vote at a watershed meeting where the number of creditors voting for and against a proposed deed of company arrangement (DOCA) is equal.