Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Credit Bidding: Secured Creditor Beware
Credit bidding has historically been a valuable right afforded to secured creditors under the Bankruptcy Code and state law. It permits the secured creditor who has a perfected lien on the debtor's property to bid the amount of its allowed claim in any sale of its collateral, without paying cash for its bid. Rather, the secured creditor can set off the amount of its secured claim against the purchase price. Secured creditors may credit bid, not only in the context of a section 363 sale, but also in the context of a Chapter 11 plan. The Supreme Court in RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. Amalgamated Bank, 132 S.Ct. 2065 (2012) established that when collateral is sold free and clear of a creditor's lien through a Chapter 11 plan, the secured creditor must be permitted, subject to the provisions of section 363(k), to bid on the assets using its outstanding secured debt. The right to credit bid under section 363(k) of the Bankruptcy Code can be an important safeguard that protects a secured creditor against the risk that its collateral may be undervalued at an asset sale, and courts have traditionally described a secured creditor's right to credit bid as fundamental and near absolute. However, as some bankruptcy courts have recently reminded us, the right is not absolute, and may be limited by the bankruptcy court “for cause” under section 363(k) of the Bankruptcy Code.
Historically, courts have found “cause” to limit credit bidding pursuant to section 363(k) in cases where there is a bona fide dispute as to the validity or extent of the secured creditor's lien or where the secured creditor has engaged in misconduct. Two recent bankruptcy court decisions, however, suggest a trend by the courts to limit a secured creditor's right to credit bid by broadening the application of the “for cause” standard under section 363(k), all in furtherance of certain policy considerations and bankruptcy goals. The courts focused on fostering a competitive and robust bidding environment and to ensure the success of the reorganization process. Limiting a secured creditor's right to credit bid, as was recently done by the courts in the In re Fisker Automotive Holdings, Inc., 2014 WL 210593 (Bankr. D.Del. Jan. 17, 2014) and In re Free Lance-Star Publishing, Case No.14-30315-KRH (Bankr. E.D.Va. April 14, 2014) bankruptcy cases, may ultimately have a dramatic impact not only on the market for secured claims but also on the overall sale and reorganization process in general, as the rights of secured creditors, especially those that purchase secured debt as a loan-to-own strategy, are becoming increasingly uncertain.
Can the Amount Of the Credit Bid Be Capped For 'Cause'?
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.
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.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?