The recent decision by the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) in Canada v Callidus Capital Corporation[1] has turned on its head the commonly understood ordering of priorities amongst secured creditors and the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) “deemed trust” claims in and out of bankruptcy proceedings.
The Brazilian Bankruptcy Law — enacted in February 2005 — has not adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law regarding transnational insolvency.
For the Cayman Islands insolvency community, 2017 could fairly be called the Year of the Redeeming Shareholder. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the ultimate appeal court for Cayman and several other important offshore jurisdictions, delivered two judgments originating from the Cayman Islands this past year.
Orders approving the sale of assets in bankruptcy provide the required authorization for the disposition of estate property outside of the ordinary course of the debtor’s business.
On Oct. 24, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in In re Pursuit Capital Management LLC[1] struck down an appeal as moot pursuant to a strict interpretation of Bankruptcy Code § 363(m) in large part due to the appellant’s failure to seek a stay of a sale order in the lower court.
In Slater v. U.S. Steel Corp,[1] the Eleventh Circuit recently revisited its past rulings on judicial estoppel and revamped the standard to be applied when a debtor is pursuing a lawsuit that was not disclosed in bankruptcy.
The opinion issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in DZ Bank Ag Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftbank, Frankfurt Am Main v. Meyer[1] is noteworthy to secured creditors in the context of the extent of the judgment to which they may be entitled as a consequence of the commission of actual fraud.
[1]A new business entity formed today more likely than not will be formed as a limited liability company (LLC).
A recent opinion issued by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Pinnacle Restaurant at Big Sky LLC v.
