Skip to main content
Home
Enter a keyword

Main navigation

Menu
  • US Law
  • Regions
    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America
  • Headlines
  • Education Resources
    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Covid 19
    • Conferences and Webinars
    • Newsletters
    • Publications
  • Firm Articles
  • About Us
    • ABI International Board Committee
    • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
  • Join ABI

Cayman investment company obtains Chapter 15 protection in the United States
2010-02-19

The United States’ Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware has recognised the liquidation of a Cayman company, Saad Investments Finance Company (No5) Limited (“SIFCO5”) (an SPV established to operate as an investment company), as a “foreign main proceeding” under Chapter 15 of the United States’ Bankruptcy Code.

Recognition of the liquidation as foreign main proceedings provides for an automatic stay of proceedings with respect to any assets of SIFCO5 within the United States, amongst other things.

Filed under:
Cayman Islands, USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Harneys, Interest, Limited liability partnership, Liquidation, Investment company, Liquidator (law), Title 11 of the US Code, Bear Stearns, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for District of Delaware
Location:
Cayman Islands, USA
Firm:
Harneys
View Original Article
New York district court refuses to recognize hedge funds’ winding up proceedings in the Cayman Islands
2008-06-09

In a recent decision,1 Judge Sweet of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York affirmed a bankruptcy court decision and refused to recognize under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code either as “foreign main proceedings” or as “foreign nonmain proceedings” the well-publicized liquidations brought in the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands by two Bear Stearns hedge funds (the “Funds”).

Filed under:
Cayman Islands, USA, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Private Client & Offshore Services, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Debtor, Asset management, Hedge funds, Legal burden of proof, Liquidation, Broker-dealer, Comity, Title 11 of the US Code, Bear Stearns, United States bankruptcy court
Location:
Cayman Islands, USA
Firm:
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
View Original Article
New York Bankruptcy Court refuses to recognize hedge funds’ winding up proceedings in the Cayman Islands
2007-09-05

In a decision rendered late last week, Judge Lifland of the Southern District of New York Bankruptcy Court refused to recognize under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code, either as “foreign main proceedings” or as “foreign nonmain proceedings,” the well-publicized liquidations brought in the Cayman Islands by two Bear Stearns hedge funds that were victims of volatility in the sub-prime lending market.

Filed under:
Cayman Islands, USA, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Hedge funds, Subprime lending, Liquidation, Distressed securities, Title 11 of the US Code, Bear Stearns, United States bankruptcy court
Location:
Cayman Islands, USA
Firm:
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
View Original Article
Re: Agrokor DD et. al. [2018] Case No. 18-12104
2019-02-13

In October 2018 Judge Glenn of the United States Bankruptcy Court (New York) considered the common law principles of comity and the English common law Gibbs rule to grant recognition of a Croatian company's settlement agreement which modified both New York and English law.

Background

Filed under:
USA, New York, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Ashfords LLP, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court
Authors:
Emma Hindon , Alan Bennett
Location:
USA
Firm:
Ashfords LLP
View Original Article
Bankruptcy mischief: fraudulent concealment and bad faith do not matter when it comes to disallowing Bankruptcy Code exemptions
2015-07-20

Desperate times call for desperate measures.  It is not surprising then that a less than scrupulous debtor might be less than candid when disclosing assets and liabilities to a bankruptcy court.  But what happens if an individual debtor is discovered to have concealed assets – possibly fraudulently or in bad faith – and then seeks to exercise his or her statutory right under the Bankruptcy Code to exempt all or a portion of the discovered assets from being available to satisfy creditors?  Can a bankruptcy court in that circumstance look to the bad acts of the debtor as a basis to take away

Filed under:
USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Tax exemption, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Bad faith, Title 11 of the US Code
Authors:
Elliot M. Smith
Location:
USA
Firm:
Squire Patton Boggs
View Original Article
The triangular setoff after SemCrude
2009-08-26

An opinion issued earlier this year by the Delaware Bankruptcy Court in In re SemCrude, L.P., et al. (Bankr. Del., No. 08-11525; January 9, 2009) may end much of the practice of so-called “triangular setoffs” by creditors in bankruptcy cases. The Court in SemCrude found that creditors violate section 553 of the Bankruptcy Code by setting off amounts among multiple debtors, even when exercising contractual assignment rights. This ruling is likely to have far-reaching impact given the dearth of case law on this fairly common contractual provision.

Filed under:
USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Security (finance), Safe harbor (law), Federal Reporter, Debt, Liability (financial accounting), US Code, Title 11 of the US Code, DuPont, Chevron Corporation, Second Circuit, Delaware Supreme Court, United States bankruptcy court
Authors:
Andrew M. Simon
Location:
USA
Firm:
Squire Patton Boggs
View Original Article
Bankruptcy Judge rules ignition switch plaintiffs cannot un-bake GM’s cake
2015-04-21

As we previewed last week, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York recently handed General Motors (“New GM”) an enormous victory that may end up shielding the company from up to $10 billion in successor liability claims.

Filed under:
USA, New York, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Due process, Title 11 of the US Code, General Motors, United States bankruptcy court
Authors:
Mark A. Salzberg , Andrew M. Simon
Location:
USA
Firm:
Squire Patton Boggs
View Original Article
Second Circuit decision results in significant nondischargeable debt as a result of new PBGC claims arising from pension plan termination in Chapter 11
2009-08-26

During the bankruptcy cycle following the recession of 2001, numerous debtors – notably airlines such as US Airways and United Air Lines, Inc. – undertook “distress terminations” of their ERISA-qualified defined benefit pension plans, which are insured by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). The PBGC found itself holding large general unsecured claims arising from significant underfunding of pension plans insured by the PBGC as a result of these terminations. Efforts by the PBGC to obtain either administrative priority or secured status for these claims invariably failed.1

Filed under:
USA, Employee Benefits & Pensions, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Bankruptcy, Employee Retirement Income Security Act 1974 (USA), Debtor, Consumer protection, Unsecured debt, Debt, Defined benefit pension plan, Bankruptcy discharge, Title 11 of the US Code, US Congress, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, United Airlines, Second Circuit, United States bankruptcy court
Authors:
Nicholas J. Brannick
Location:
USA
Firm:
Squire Patton Boggs
View Original Article
Show me the money – courts in the Second Circuit continue to apply section 109 to Chapter 15 cases and cash in the bank does the job
2015-01-20

In December 2013, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that section 109 of the Bankruptcy Code was applicable to Chapter 15 cases.  In Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP v. Barnet (In re Barnet), 737 F.3d 238 (2d Cir.

Filed under:
USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Title 11 of the US Code, Second Circuit
Authors:
Peter R. Morrison
Location:
USA
Firm:
Squire Patton Boggs
View Original Article
An English man in New York COMI in the UK or the Us?
2014-03-31

Summary

Following the US case of Morning Mist Holdings when a Court of Appeals decided that COMI had to be analysed on the date of the Chapter 15 case petition, we look again at the case of Kemsley where the US bankruptcy court held that COMI had to be analysed on the date of the filing of the UK bankruptcy. We consider whether this could have affected the outcome of the Kemsley case and look at the factors used by the English and US Courts to interpret an individual debtor’s COMI.

Background

Filed under:
United Kingdom, USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Bankruptcy, Injunction, Title 11 of the US Code
Location:
United Kingdom, USA
Firm:
Squire Patton Boggs
View Original Article

Pagination

  • Current page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Page 7
  • Page 8
  • Page 9
  • …
  • Next page ››
  • Last page Last »

Footer menu

  • Publications
  • Newsletters
  • ABI International Board Committee

© 2022 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved