Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b><i> In Re Fairfield Sentry Limited</i></b>
Krys v. Farnum Place, LLC (In re Fairfield Sentry Ltd.), 768 F.3d 239 (2d Cir. 2014) (Fairfield Sentry) is the first federal circuit court decision to address the application of Section 363 in a Chapter 15 bankruptcy case. Enacted in 2005, Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code applies to cross-border insolvency proceedings. Chapter 15 enables the representative of the foreign bankruptcy estate to apply to a U.S. bankruptcy court for recognition of a foreign insolvency proceeding and, if recognition is granted, relief in aid of that proceeding. Where the foreign proceeding is recognized as a foreign main proceeding (i.e., a foreign insolvency proceeding pending in the location of the debtor's center of main interests), Section 1520(a) automatically makes certain core provisions of the Bankruptcy Code applicable as to matters within the United States.
The meaning and application of Section 1520(a)(2) was at the heart of the Fairfield Sentry decision. Section 1520(a)(2) makes Section 363 (among other Code sections) applicable upon foreign main recognition to “the transfer of an interest of the debtor in property that is within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States to the same extent that the section[] would apply to property of an estate.” Undertaking a “plain meaning” statutory analysis, the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit in Fairfield Sentry held that, when triggered under Chapter 15, Section 363 applies no differently than it would in a plenary bankruptcy case, and requires the bankruptcy court to perform an independent review of the proposed sale under the well-established Section 363 standards, even if the foreign court overseeing the main proceeding has previously approved the transaction.
More broadly, the Fairfield Sentry case raises a fundamental question as to the role of comity ' and its limits ' in a Chapter 15 case. Comity is a long-standing doctrine in private international law, defined by the U.S. Supreme Court as “the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard both to international duty and convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens or of other persons who are under the protections of its laws.” Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113, 164 (1895).
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?