Lawyers typically stand in awe of courts’ “inherent power” – we understand that compliance with courts’ whims as well as their directives, and unambiguous candor, are essential if we are to escape the broad range of sanctions that courts have at their disposal.  In Law v.

As complex restructurings increasingly implicate cross-border considerations, other countries’ insolvency laws have become increasingly more relevant to practitioners in the U.S. This article will focus on creditors’ in various jurisdictions to provide a better understanding of how foreign creditors protect their rights in an insolvency proceeding.

A recent decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP v. Barnet,[1] which found that the bankruptcy court should not have granted chapter 15 recognition to the foreign insolvency proceeding of an Australian company, adds to the growing body of recent case law evidencing that courts will evaluate the relief a foreign representative seeks under the established standards and requirements applicable to cases under other chapters of the Bankruptcy Code.

^[1]“Removal” refers to the process of transferring litigation to a federal court from another forum. Bankruptcy practitioners should be aware of two provisions that provide for removal of civil litigation to federal court: 28 U.S.C.