%1

Fraudulent-transfer law is a crucial component of debtor/creditor relationships. In the bankruptcy context, fraudulent intent is an essential element for both a trustee’s clawback power through § 548‌(a)‌(1)‌(A) of the Bankruptcy Code[1] and for denial of a discharge through § 727‌(a)‌(2). The language of these statutes directly descends from the Statute of Elizabeth, which was written in 1571.[2]

The Bankruptcy Code revisions in the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 included a requirement that a court appoint a consumer privacy ombudsman (CPO) in some cases involving the sale of personally identifiable information. This requirement has now been in effect for over 10 years, and the time is ripe to assess the CPO’s role in bankruptcy cases.

Background

This article outlines the legislative framework behind and briefly describes the process of a bankruptcy proceeding,[1] the Canadian equivalent of a chapter 7 filing in the U.S. Proposals under the BIA and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, the Canadian equivalents to a chapter 11 filing in the U.S., will be dealt with in a subsequent article.

Justice Antonin Scalia's death this past February left a vacancy on the Supreme Court and set off a partisan battle over the confirmation of his successor. In the months following his death, his legacy and conservative sway on the world’s most powerful Court has been examined, and much attention has been given to his legal opinions, both in terms of his writing style and conservative substance.

If a debtor has received a fraudulent transfer, he or she may also have incurred a nondischargeable debt. According to a recent ruling by the Supreme Court, the discharge exception for “actual fraud” is now broad enough to include the liability imposed, if any, on the recipient of fraudulent transfer. The Court resolved a circuit split in Husky International Electronics Inc. v.

[1]Chapter 11 has largely become the sale chapter of the Bankruptcy Code. If the case is not a quick sale case, then it probably is a debt-for-equity swap. A traditional chapter 11 reorganization is expensive and, because of its relatively low success rate, is viewed by many lenders as not worth it.

One element of the bankruptcy process that is frequently confusing to new bankruptcy practitioners and nonbankruptcy lawyers is the U.S. Trustee Program. Although it is not infrequently assumed that the U.S. Trustee Program is part of the judicial branch, the U.S. Trustee is a component of the Department of Justice.

Once a debtor files a chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding, it must confirm a plan of reorganization or liquidate its assets under a liquidating chapter 11 or chapter 7 case. Confirmation requires compliance with all the provisions of chapter 11, including the absolute priority rule. What happens when a chapter 11 debtor is unable to effectuate the substantial consummation of a plan?