Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Leased Property in Bankruptcy: Residential vs. Non-Residential
When a person or business entity files for bankruptcy, many of that petitioning debtor's assets will be protected from immediate seizure or other taking by the Bankruptcy Code's automatic stay provisions. Such provisions enjoin creditors from taking any action to collect debts or repossess property (with certain exceptions), and they come into force at the moment the bankruptcy petition is filed.
When the property in question is non-residential real property held by the bankruptcy petitioner through a lease, creditors are initially prevented from moving to repossess the property, but only for a short time, unless the bankruptcy trustee takes certain actions. For example, 11 U.S.C. §365 covers executory contracts and unexpired leases. Section 365(d)(4) states that if the trustee does not assume or reject an unexpired lease of nonresidential real property under which the debtor is the lessee within a prescribed amount of time, then such lease is deemed rejected and the trustee is required to immediately surrender the nonresidential real property to the lessor. A code provision like this should spur a bankruptcy trustee to act quickly to assume or reject a debtor's unexpired leases on nonresidential property, on pain of losing the automatic stay protections.
Further, under 11 U.S.C. §541(b)(2), a bankruptcy debtor's interest in a lease of nonresidential real property that has terminated at the end of the stated term of the lease and before the commencement of the bankruptcy case is not part of the bankruptcy estate — and thus not protected by the automatic stay, and 11 U.S.C. §362(2)(10) further explains that the Bankruptcy Code's automatic stay provision is not to be applied to expired leases on nonresidential real property.
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?