Sites Committee

Committees

Post date: Thursday, November 06, 2014

There are two types of foreclosure proceedings in the U.S.: judicial and nonjudicial. Both proceedings contain procedures for oversecured creditors to recover attorneys’ fees and costs from the proceeds of the collateral securing the indebtedness.

Post date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014

[1]In the latest installment of the Lehman Brothers subordination litigation, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York held that certain creditors’ claims were not claims for damages arising from “securities of the debtor,” and did not have to be subordinated to claims of creditors, notwithstanding that the debtor was treated as an issuer, for regulatory purposes, as an issuer of the mortgage-backed securities.[2]

Post date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014

The secondary bankruptcy claims market has become big business over the past several years, resulting in a proliferation of court rulings that underscore risks and “regulation” around claims-trading, especially when claims are purchased for strategic objectives and not anticipated cash recovery.

Post date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Photo of Nancy A. Peterman
Nancy A. Peterman

[1]Over the years, claims-trading has become the norm in bankruptcy cases. Claims are bought and sold for various reasons, including to liquidate a position, profit from an increase in the claim’s value and/or leverage a claim into the ownership of the debtor.

Post date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014

In June 2014, the Eighth Circuit reversed its own August 2012 panel decision that had allowed a chapter 11 debtor/licensor  to “reject” a perpetual, royalty-free trademark license agreement as an “executory contract.” The entire Eighth Circuit determined that a perpetual, royalty-free trademark license was not an executory contract and not subject to an assumption or rejection by a lic

Post date: Monday, October 20, 2014

You are embroiled in a contentious trade secret lawsuit. In the midst of the litigation, your competitor files for bankruptcy and proposes to sell its assets. Do those assets include the trade secrets? Which court makes that determination?

Post date: Monday, October 20, 2014

The Fall of OGX
Former billionaire Eike Batista’s oil firm OGX filed for bankruptcy protection in late October 2013 after OGX had defaulted on a $45 million bond payment earlier in the month.[1] On October 30th, 2013, OGX Petróleo e Gás Participações S.A. (“OGX Participações”)[2] and OGX Petróleo e Gás S.A. (“OGX Petróleo e Gás”), both Brazilian companies; OGX International GMBH (“OGX International”), an Austrian company; and OGX Austria GMBH (“OGX Austria”), also an Austrian company, filed for reorganization before the Fourth Business Court of Rio de Janeiro (RJ).

Post date: Monday, October 20, 2014

Editor's note:  Following is an article by Robin Darton of Tanner De Witt (an established, independent Hong Kong law firm), addressing issues in his home venue of Hong Kong. Robin is particularly well suited to the task,having practiced for over 20 years as a solicitor in Hong Kong in litigation and other contentious issues, with an emphasis on contentious insolvency and restructuring matters in the UK, Hong Kong and the Asia region. TAB

Post date: Monday, October 20, 2014

On June 6, 2014, the French Constitutional Court (Conseil constitutionnel) ruled on the question of whether a court should be entitled to convert a receivership proceeding into a winding-up proceeding on its own initiative.

Post date: Monday, October 13, 2014

Corporate veil-piercing is nearly as old as limited liability, the privilege it circumscribes.[1] Normally, limited liability conjures an image of a veil between a corporation and its owner, thereby shielding the assets of the latter, whether a natural or artificial person,[2]

Pages

Please note that in order to view the content for the Committee Newsletters you must either sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member