Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Dueling Provisions: Creditor Prevails in Showdown Between Bankruptcy Code Sections

By Adam Schlagman

A Missouri bankruptcy court has permitted a creditor to take possession of spare aircraft parts and equipment from a debtor despite the fact that the creditor failed to perfect its security interest in the equipment. In an issue of first impression in the Sixth Circuit, the court held that under the plain language of Section 1110 of the Bankruptcy Code, a creditor, as a conditional vendor, had a right to take possession of the collateral pursuant to its agreement with the debtor, and that this right was not limited or otherwise affected by any other section of the Code (including Section 544) or by any power of the court. Vanguard Airlines, Inc. v. International Aero Components, Inc., 295 B.R. 908 (Bkrtcy.W.D.Mo.,2003).

Prior to filing for bankruptcy, Vanguard Airlines, Inc. entered into a transaction with International Aero Components, Inc. and GMAC Commercial Finance, LLC (hereinafter collectively referred to as “IAC” or ” creditor”), whereby the air carrier sold aircraft parts to IAC and simultaneously repurchased those assets from IAC on a fixed payment schedule. The agreement provided that IAC had the right to take possession of the aircraft parts in the event Vanguard defaulted. IAC did not perfect its security interest in the aircraft equipment by recording its interest with the Federal Aviation Administration or by filing a UCC-1 financing statement. Vanguard later defaulted on the agreement and filed for Chapter 11 relief. When the debtor failed to cure its default after filing for bankruptcy, IAC filed a proof of claim, asserting a security interest in the debtor's aircraft parts. The debtor filed an adversary proceeding alleging that the proof of claim was deficient. The debtor also sought to avoid IAC's unperfected security interest under ' 544. IAC then filed an amended proof of claim and an answer to the complaint, but neither document mentioned its rights under '1110. The creditor then sent the debtor a written demand to surrender and return the aircraft parts pursuant to '1110. The debtor refused and sought leave in the adversary proceeding to amend its pleadings to show that IAC was not entitled to relief.

Read These Next
The Article 8 Opt In Image

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.

Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers Image

There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

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 Image

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.

Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases Image

The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.