Satish Kumar Gupta and Others
(Essar Steel case) held
that allowing claims apart from those covered in a resolution plan
to survive after the approval of a resolution plan militates
against the rationale of Section 31 of the IBC. The Supreme Court
held that the successful resolution applicant should be given an
opportunity to take over and run the business of the corporate
debtor on a clean slate. Accordingly, a resolution applicant should
not be suddenly faced with undecided claims which would
throw into uncertainty the amounts payable by a resolution
applicant to take over the business of the corporate debtor.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the S.D.N.Y. provided clarity in
the Fairfield Sentry litigation on the implication of Sections
546(e) and 561(d), U.S. bankruptcy safe harbor laws, on foreign
claw-back claims. Judge Stuart M. Bernstein - who retired on
September 30, 2020 but is currently serving on recall through early
next year - authored the opinion.
In effect, Judge Bernstein decided that Bankruptcy Code Section
546(e) - the safe harbor - barred BVI statutory
avoidance claims being pursued in bankruptcy proceedings in the
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
On October 8, Greenfire Oil and Gas Ltd. and Greenfire
Hangingstone Operating Corporation (collectively, Greenfire) each
filed a Notice of Intention to Make a Proposal pursuant to section
50.4(1) of the
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada), RSC
1985, c B-3, as may be amended from time to time (the BIA) (such
proceedings, referred to herein as the NOI Proceedings) and Alvarez
& Marsal Canada Inc. was appointed as Proposal Trustee (the
Proposal Trustee) of Greenfire. Greenfire is focused on oilsands
development and production and their primary asset is a