Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Third Circuit Sides With Creditors in EFIH Make-Whole Dispute
At the end of last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit added to several recent decisions addressing whether a creditor was entitled to payment of a “make- whole” premium in connection with a Chapter 11 case. See Delaware Trust Co. v. Energy Future Intermediate Holding Co. (In re Energy Future Holdings), 842 F.3d 247 (3d. Cir. 2016)). The Third Circuit's opinion is the most creditor-friendly decision issued to date on this topic, as the court found that the refinancing of certain first- and second-lien notes after EFIH's Chapter 11 cases triggered payment of a “make-whole” premium. Notably, the Third Circuit found that the ” make-whole” premium was payable despite the fact that the indentures governing the notes did not expressly provide for payment of the premium in the event of an EFIH bankruptcy.
Background
In 2010, Energy Futures Intermediate Holding Company and EFIH Finance (collectively, EFIH) issued approximately $4 billion in 10% first-lien notes due 2020 pursuant to an indenture governed by New York law. Two specific indenture provisions were of significance. First, § 3.07, captioned “Optional Redemption,” provided that “[a]t any time prior to December 1, 2015, [EFIH] may redeem all or a part of the Notes at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes redeemed plus the Applicable Premium.” Id. at 251. The amount of the “Applicable Premium” decreased over time, and was structured to compensate noteholders for interest that would have otherwise been paid through the Notes' stated maturity date following an early redemption. Id.
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?