US issues (including Chapter 11)

Choice of venue and applicability of chapter 11

The threshold for commencing a case under chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code is relatively low, so jurisdiction can be established if the debtor’s domicile, residence, principal place of business or principal assets is in the US. Non-US practitioners are often surprised to learn that the mere presence of assets (eg a US bank account) may suffice. For more information, see Practice Note: US Chapter 11 proceedings.

The debtor may wish to choose a particular state within the US (eg New York, Texas or Delaware) to file in based on various factors, including the location of key stakeholders, local court experience and different binding precedents on certain legal issues.

Certain entities may not file for chapter 11 relief, including insurance companies and banks.

If the business cannot be saved, it may choose to liquidate under chapter 7 (orderly liquidation may also be commenced under chapter 11). For more information, see Practice Note: US Chapter 7 liquidation.

Benefits of chapter 11

Benefits of filing for chapter 11 protection include:

  1. it is a restructuring

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Restructuring & Insolvency News

High Court clarifies position of sole directors under Model Articles and the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and in-court appointment of administrators (Re KRF Services (UK) Ltd and others)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: This High Court case (which addresses two important issues in UK company law and sanctions regulations) will be of interest to insolvency practitioners, corporate and restructuring lawyers, sanctions lawyers, and businesses and individuals which are affected by sanctions. Firstly, it clarifies the position of sole directors under the Model Articles for private limited companies. The court ruled that a sole director can validly pass board resolutions and bind the company, regardless of whether they have always been the sole director or were previously part of a multi-member board. This interpretation resolves conflicts between Article 7(2) and Article 11(2) of the Model Articles, with the court favouring Article 7(2)'s provisions. Secondly, the case examines the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and the in-court appointment of administrators. The court determined that making an administration application and order does not breach asset-freezing sanctions, even when the company is designated or controlled by a sanctioned person. While an Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) license is typically required for administrators to act, the court retains discretion to make immediate appointments in urgent situations. Written by Joshua Ray and Duncan Henderson, partners at CANDEY, which acted for the applicants on this matter.

View Restructuring & Insolvency by content type :

Popular documents