Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the Spotlight: New Bankruptcy Law Is Not All Good for Landlords
On April 20, 2005, President Bush signed into law the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which significantly changed the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. While various aspects of the new law give landlords greater rights in tenant bankruptcies, the law is not all good for landlords. The benefits of the new law for commercial landlords have been written about extensively, including an analysis of the new provisions setting definitive deadlines for a tenant to assume or reject a lease under the Bankruptcy Code. What has not been highlighted is that if a commercial tenant files a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case, a landlord's space could be tied up for 120 days or more, instead of 60 days or more under the old law. (This article does not address the special rules and protections for landlords of residential properties and is devoted to a discussion of the provisions regarding commercial properties.)
This situation may occur because many tenants file Chapter 7 bankruptcies, a trustee is appointed, and there is no effort to reorganize the business. For this reason, a landlord will need to be much more proactive in cases where the tenant files Chapter 7 bankruptcy and should not just idly sit by and allow the lengthened time period to run.
The filing of a tenant bankruptcy 'stays,' or prohibits, the landlord from taking any action against the tenant, such as eviction, without bankruptcy court approval and is designed to give the tenant or bankruptcy trustee breathing room while it decides what to do with the premises. In a bankruptcy, the tenant, whether a Chapter 11 debtor or a Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee, has essentially three options:
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?