Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Form vs. Function: When Is a Lease a 'True Lease'? The Seventh Circuit Applies Substance over Form in United Airlines v. HSBC Bank
Financing deals have become increasingly complicated as parties attempt to raise capital and take advantage of accounting and tax incentives. These transactions often face scrutiny when one party files for bankruptcy. During a Chapter 11 reorganization, a debtor must use all tools at its disposal to best restructure its obligations. In contrast, a creditor must work to ensure it receives the best possible return. The term “lease” is not defined in the Bankruptcy Code. Due to this lack of a clear definition, creditors and debtors will often attempt to recharacterize agreements between the parties. In this context, a secured creditor or debtor may argue that a “lease” is actually a disguised secured financing. In the converse, a party could also argue a secured financing is actually a “true lease.” This is due to the Bankruptcy Code's different treatment of secured debt and leases. Depending on the factual scenario, this differing treatment could significantly change the parties' obligations.
This article reviews the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals' recent decision in United Airlines, Inc. v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 416 F.3d 609 (7th Cir. 2005). In this decision, authored by Judge Frank H. Easterbrook, the court held that it must look to the substance of a transaction and beyond the label given by the parties to determine whether it is a “true lease.”
Leases and secured finance transactions are treated differently by the Bankruptcy Code. If a transaction is deemed a secured financing, the secured claim will be tied to the current value of the collateral as opposed to the entire loan. Any undersecured portion of a creditor's claim is subject to the pro rata distribution to unsecured creditors. 11 U.S.C. '506. A secured creditor may be forced to accept certain treatment absent its consent under a plan if the Debtor complies with provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. See 11 U.S.C. '1129.
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.