Gleave and others v The Board of the Pension Protection Fund [2008] EWHC 1099 (Ch)

The High Court ruled that calculations of employer debt by scheme actuaries cannot be challenged by insolvency practitioners unless there is evidence of fraud or error.

The English Court has ordered that meetings be convened on 4 July 2008 for creditors to vote on the solvent schemes of arrangement being proposed by 82 members of the E W Payne Pools. The E W Payne Pools have been in run-off for over 20 years and, it is predicted, that the run-off could last, if not for the proposed schemes, for at least another 20 years. The purpose of the schemes is to bring that run-off to an early close. The schemes establish a method for the valuation and payment of cedants' current and future claims against the Pools.

A company went into administration and company voluntary arrangements were entered into to effect a rescue of viable parts of the group. As part of that process, a valuation of the liabilities of the companies as at 1 October 2001 was required. They included claims arising under section 75 of the Pensions Act 1995. However, those debts were not triggered until July 2004 and the scheme actuary for did not sign the section 75 certificates and apportion shares amongst the various companies until March 2006.

[2008] EWHC 1099 (Ch)

The High Court has ruled that calculations of employer debt by scheme actuaries cannot be challenged by insolvency practitioners unless there is evidence of fraud or error.

In an important decision for secured creditors, the Ninth Circuit recently held that the proper “cramdown” valuation of a secured creditor’s collateral is its replacement value, regardless of whether the foreclosure value would generate a higher valuation of the collateral. The appellate court’s decision has the potential to significantly impact lenders that include certain types of restrictions on the use of the collateral (such as low income housing requirements) in their financing documents.

AN FTI CONSULTING White PAPER DECEMBER 2016

...accounting standards applying to recognition and measurement of a company's assets can be complex and need to be interpreted and applied with care to ensure the valuations are fit for purpose

Asset-based valuations: Valuation floor or flawed valuation?

Mark Bezant and David Rogers

Synopsis

On October 11, 2016, Chief Judge Brendan L. Shannon of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court issued a letter ruling in which he opined on the appropriate valuation of a first lien. A copy of the Opinion is available here.

In Re Appraisal Of DFC Global Corp., Consol. C.A. 10107-CB (July 8, 2016)

This decision deals with the always difficult world of what beta to use in a DCF valuation. The Court’s analysis is an exhaustive review of the alternative approaches and is particularly helpful in valuing a publicly traded company in some financial turmoil.

On June 6, 2016, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”) issued a new proposed rule clarifying the agency’s authority to facilitate the merger of multiemployer pension plans. The rule would implement some of the statutory changes made by the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act of 2014 (“MPRA”).

Background

The Pension Protection Fund (“PPF”) has updated its approach to employer restructuring guidance and its general guidance for restructuring and insolvency professionals. These documents set out certain criteria that should be met when making proposals to the PPF in respect of a sponsoring employer suffering an insolvency event.

1. The PPF Approach to Employer Restructuring: