Congress must be allowed“to fashion a modern bankruptcy system which places the basic rudiments of the bankruptcy process in the hands of an expert equitable tribunal.”
—from Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33, 94 (1989) (Blackmun dissent, emphasis added).
Justice Blackmun had a point—back in 1989—that remains true today:
Creditors of distressed businesses are often frustrated by shareholder-controlled boards when directors pursue strategies that appear to be designed to benefit shareholders at the creditors’ expense. In these circumstances, creditors might consider sending a letter to the board to convince the directors to pivot and adopt alternative strategies or face risk of liability for breaching fiduciary duties. The efficacy of this approach depends on many factors, including the company’s financial condition, the board’s composition and the underlying transactions at issue.
The EU Directive on Preventive Restructuring Frameworks (the“Directive”) precipitated a pan-European review by Member States of their corporate restructuring statutes. Several Member States (including Germany and the Netherlands), as well as the United Kingdom, made sweeping changes to their insolvency processes, in some cases introducing entirely new restructuring mechanisms. By contrast, Ireland preserved its examinership regime, introduced over 30 years ago.
Earlier this year, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California granted in part and denied in part cross-motions for summary judgment in an action concerning “piecemeal exemptions” to California’s usury law.
Assignment for benefit of creditors (“ABC”) laws are, historically, a debtor remedy. ABC laws are a voluntary debtor tool for shutting down and winding up the debtor’s failed business.
Ancient History
ABC laws began under the common law, back in merrie olde England, arising out of the law of trusts. Under trust law, any person can, without restriction, transfer assets into a trust for the benefit of one or more people.
“Under the long-standing ‘solvent-debtor exception,’ plaintiffs [unsecured trade creditors] possess an equitable right to receive post-petition interest at the contractual or default state law rate, subject to any other equitable considerations, before [the debtor] collects surplus value from the bankruptcy estate,” held the Ninth Circuit on Aug. 29, 2022. In re PG&E Corporation, 2022 WL 3712498, *4 (9th Cir. Aug. 29, 2022) (2-1).
A bankruptcy court ruled that a creditor didn’t need to seek derivative standing to sue a liquidating trustee. The creditor, himself a trustee of the debtor’s employee stock-option plan, had standing to sue without prior court permission because his suit wasn’t brought on behalf of the bankruptcy estate. In re Foods, Inc., Case No. 14-02689, Adv. Pro. No. 21-3022, 2022 Bankr. LEXIS 2331 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa Aug. 23, 2022).
Bankruptcy is a formal process geared toward preserving stakeholder value. Often, the proceedings include negotiations between stakeholders that are arduous, time-consuming and expensive. As such, the main focus during bankruptcy tends to be on completing the process, rather than positioning the company for healthy and sustainable growth after emergence.
On July 29, 2022, Laurie S.
The Bankruptcy Protector