Help Center

Winter Leadership Conference | December 5-7 | Rancho Palos Verdes , CA Register Today View Schedule

International Committee

Committees


Kenneth David Kraft
Post date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015

An unprecedented filing leads to an unprecedented joint solution from the both the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice -Commercial List supervising the Nortel liquidation in Canada and the U.S.

Post date: Wednesday, April 22, 2015

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that a bankruptcy court must conduct a § 363 review of a chapter 15 debtor’s sale of U.S. assets, even if the sale was previously approved by a foreign court.[1] Although it acknowledged that comity is an important consideration in a chapter 15 proceedings, the Second Circuit determined that § 1520(a)(2)[2] “acts as a brake or limitation on comity” by requiring bankruptcy courts to conduct the § 363[3] review.[4]

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: Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Readers may be familiar with the continuing debates over universalism (one court and one insolvency law) vs. territorialism (many courts and many insolvency laws) that have dominated discussions of cross-border insolvencies in recent years.[1] Realizing that true universalism is an ideal that is unlikely to come to pass in the real world, universalists have generally embraced a modified universalism that acknowledges circumstances that make it proper and (practically and politically) necessary to recognize and protect certain local interests.

Post date: Thursday, June 19, 2014

Editor’s note: This article relies on a translation of the EBL provided by the Bankruptcy Law and Restructuring Research Center of China University of Politics and Law, as supervised by Prof. Li Shuguang, September 2006.

Post date: Friday, May 16, 2014

[1]Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code was enacted in 2005 to implement the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency formulated by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). Part of the reason for needing a U.S. implementation of the Model Law was in recognition of the mutli-national presences of many entities, and thus the need for multi-national solutions for insolvencies of these entities.[2]

Post date: Friday, May 16, 2014

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.

Post date: Thursday, May 15, 2014

Brazilian Federal Law No. 12.846/13 (the “Anti-Corruption Law”), which became effective on Jan. 29, 2014, establishes the civil and administrative liability of legal entities for acts that are harmful to the public administration, and applies to both domestic and foreign entities.

Pages

Mr. E. Patrick Shea
Co-Chair
Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
Toronto, ON
(416) 369-7399

Mr. Rafael X. Zahralddin-Aravena
Co-Chair
Elliott Greenleaf
Wilmington, DE
(302) 384-9400

Mr. M. Shane Johnson
Communications Manager
Porter & Hedges, LLP
Houston, TX
(713) 226-6000

Mr. Joshua Pichinson
Communications Manager
AgencyIP
Santa Clara, CA
(650) 454-8001

Mr. Joshua M. Fried
Education Director
Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP
San Francisco, CA
(415) 263-7000

Mr. Francesco Spizzirri
Education Director
Audax Law
Toronto, ON
(416) 862-8329

Mr. Ben Sewell
Membership Relations Director
Sewell & Kettle Lawyers
Sydney,
+61282510075

Ms. Jamie R. Netznik
Newsletter Editor
Mayer Brown LLP
Chicago, IL
(312) 701-8741

Ms. Oksana Koltko Rosaluk, Esq.
Newsletter Editor
DLA Piper
Chicago, IL
(312) 368-3974

Mr. Kyle James Ortiz
Special Projects Leader
Togut, Segal & Segal LLP
New York, NY
(212) 594-5000

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