Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Public-private partnerships (P3s) have been gaining increased favor in the U.S. as a way for the public sector to harness the expertise and efficiencies of the private sector in meeting the infrastructure and social needs of local and state governments. Although P3s have been used for many years for the building of “toll” roads and bridges, they are now gaining popularity for building and repairing a wide array of infrastructures including: water systems; sewer systems; buses running on natural gas, light rail systems, and other transportation; courthouses; jails; affordable living accommodations, mixed use development of retail and housing on government-owned land, dormitories and housing for universities. P3s have been successfully used in Canada and Europe to build all of the above and more, including hospitals, for many years.
Although there is promise for this type of P3 use in the U.S., there are still many barriers and challenges to overcome. This type of creative financing between entities that do not typically partner (i.e., the public and private sectors) presents unique and challenging issues for in-house counsel trying to protect their companies while not killing the deals. Based on our experience counseling clients in these matters, the following is an overview of issues and considerations that in-house counsel should keep in mind when approaching P3 projects.
Structuring the Projects
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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.
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.
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?
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.