On May 30, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (the “Second Circuit” or the “Court”) rendered a much anticipated opinion (the “Opinion”),1 reversing the order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “District Court”) that the Bankruptcy Code does not permit non-consensual third-party releases of direct claims and affirming the order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the
Section 503(b)(9) Overview
Over recent years, a prolonged period of low interest rates, together with a competitive financing market, has resulted in greater leverage and control for private companies (and their sponsors) when it comes to negotiating terms with current and potential creditors. There has also been, as a consequence of this dynamic and the general availability of capital, an expansion in debt document flexibility over the course of the last decade.
Close economic ties and interdependence between the US and Canada have been bolstered by free trade policies and intensified global competition, paving the way for continued opportunities for US businesses to tap into the Canadian market. These opportunities have resulted in an active cross-border lending market. In light of this, US lenders who are lending into Canada may encounter, and should be aware of, Canadian-specific legal issues and considerations.
When a company is not likely to survive a restructuring, its assets may have value to a third-party buyer. Absent legal protection, a buyer of a financially distressed business will usually be concerned that the company’s creditors could pursue the acquired business on various legal theories, including “successor liability,” and on that basis may decline to purchase assets of such a business.
All too often, vendors and suppliers are paralyzed by a customer’s bankruptcy filing (that is, if they are even aware of it in a timely manner). The lack of action, or awareness, could wind up costing these creditors valuable recovery. In this alert, we discuss administrative claims under Section 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.
The Bankruptcy Code’s Subchapter V provides hope to formerly successful entrepreneurs. It’s a hope that never before existed.
I’ll try to explain.
Formerly Successful Entrepreneurs – A Historical Problem
The Bankruptcy Code became effective in October of 1979. And I’ve been practicing under the Bankruptcy Code from the beginning: licensed in 1980.
Here’s an observation that’s been true throughout my career, until enactment of Subchapter V:
Bankruptcy Basics for New and Non-Bankruptcy Attorneys
This entry is part of Nelson Mullins’s ongoing “Bankruptcy Basics” blog series that is intended to address foundational aspects of bankruptcy for new and non-bankruptcy practitioners and professionals. This entry will discuss the general structure of bankruptcy claims and the differences between how unsecured, secured, and priority claims are treated in a bankruptcy case.
A “claim” against a bankruptcy estate is defined as a:
“How did you go bankrupt?
“Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”
- Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises
Whether from internal or external factors, every company at some point will experience financial stress. The key to avoiding the extreme zone of financial distress—insolvency and “suddenly” bankruptcy—is to be proactive early on—when financial challenges are progressing “gradually.”