Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • 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
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    PIF revisited - no right not to be diluted
    2011-10-07

    On 5 October 2011 Justice Barrett of the Supreme Court of NSW handed down a decision in Centro Retail Limited and Centro MCS Manager Limited in its capacity as Responsible Entity of the Centro Retail Trust [2011] NSWSC 1175 (“Centro”) where he found that the responsible entity of Centro Retail Trust would be justified in modifying the constitution of the trust without unitholder approval to a insert a provision permitting the issue of units at a price different to that provided for by the pre-existing provisions.

    Filed under:
    Australia, New South Wales, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, King & Wood Mallesons, Retail, Security (finance), Investment funds, Market value, Net asset value, Unilateralism, Australian Securities Exchange, ING Group, Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Constitutional amendment, Corporations Act 2001 (Australia), Constitution, Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales Supreme Court
    Authors:
    Brian Murphy
    Location:
    Australia
    Firm:
    King & Wood Mallesons
    Granite Re entitled to pre- and post-judgment interest in bankruptcy action
    2011-03-10

    Following a $9 million judgment in its favor, Granite Re was further awarded pre- and post-judgment interest on that judgment. Granite Re filed a proof of claim in Acceptance Insurance’s bankruptcy action for the amount of $10.9 million, the balance of the premium due under a reinsurance contract plus interest. Acceptance disputed the claim, arguing it no longer needed reinsurance, and filed a separate adversary proceeding against Granite Re alleging unjust enrichment. The Eighth Circuit’s Bankruptcy Appellate Panel reversed the bankruptcy court’s ruling in favor of Acceptance.

    Filed under:
    USA, Nebraska, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Jorden Burt LLP, Bankruptcy, Interest, Reinsurance, Unjust enrichment, Precondition, Unilateralism, Eighth Circuit, United States bankruptcy court, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Authors:
    John Black
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Jorden Burt LLP
    Another pension plan bites the dust
    2011-08-12

    On Monday, August 8, 2011, United States Bankruptcy Court Judge Mary Walrath ruled that Harry & David Holdings Inc. the Oregon-based gourmet food and gift company, can terminate its pension plan as part of a pre-arranged bankruptcy plan and emerge from bankruptcy free of its accumulated pension liability. The company convinced the court that it had to terminate the plan in order to successfully emerge from bankruptcy.

    Filed under:
    USA, Employee Benefits & Pensions, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP, Bankruptcy, Liability (financial accounting), State-owned enterprise, Defined benefit pension plan, Sponsor (commercial), Inflation, Unilateralism, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, United States bankruptcy court
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP
    Weathering the storm: retiree benefits and Section 1114
    2009-05-27

    Retiree benefits are often a central issue in bankruptcy cases. For many employers the high cost of retiree medical benefits has been a significant contributing factor to the Chapter 11 filing and a matter of ongoing concern if the debtor is to be able to successfully reorganize. Understandably, employees, retirees and unions are equally concerned about the status of retiree benefits. Their obvious interest is to attempt to prevent the erosion of benefits that had been expected to be available during retirement.

    Filed under:
    USA, Employee Benefits & Pensions, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Haynes and Boone LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Trade union, Retirement, Good faith, Business judgement rule, At-will employment, Unilateralism, US Congress, US Code, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Haynes and Boone LLP
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days