Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A recent decision from Chief Judge Glenn of the Southern District of New York Bankruptcy Court provides clarity to creditors and debtors alike in cases where the parties' settlement negotiations include an agreement requiring a creditor to support the debtor's Chapter 11 plan. In In re GOL Linhas Aéreas Inteligentes S.A., –B.R.–, 2024 WL 1716490 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Apr. 22, 2024) (GOL Linhas), Judge Glenn considered whether a "lockup" provision that required the non-debtor counterparty to support any plan later filed by the debtors was permissible under the circumstances. Although Judge Glenn approved the debtors' settlements with the counterparties, he held that the lockup provision in each of the stipulations was unenforceable. The decision provides extensive discussion of restructuring support agreements in general, the policies encouraging these agreements, and the countervailing considerations that render lockup provisions impermissible under certain circumstances. The decision clearly articulates the contours of the jurisprudence on restructuring support agreements and lockup provisions, which should give creditors and debtors in Chapter 11 cases in the Southern District of New York a better understanding of where to focus their negotiations and whether to expend time and resources insisting on a lockup provision that could be stricken by the bankruptcy court.
In GOL Linhas, the jointly-administered debtors (the Debtors), who operated a Brazilian airline, were negotiating agreements with their aircraft lessors for modifications of lease terms to be consistent with the Debtors' commercial objectives in their Chapter 11 cases. The terms of the Debtors' debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing required the Debtors to, among other things, enter into lease modification agreements for 65 and then 90 aircraft within certain deadlines. To that end, the Debtors negotiated agreements and stipulations with various aircraft lessor counterparties, which stipulations all included a lockup provision requiring the counterparties to support any plan filed by the Debtors at a later date. Specifically, the lockup provision provided that, if a disclosure statement for a Chapter 11 plan is approved by the bankruptcy court, each counterparty agreed that it shall vote to accept the plan so long as the plan and disclosure statement are not inconsistent with the terms of the settlement, there are no defaults on the Debtors' post-petition obligations to the counterparty, and the Debtors achieve certain liquidity and debt ratio benchmarks measured as of the effective date of the plan. The Debtors' Chapter 11 cases were in their infancy at the time the Debtors entered into the settlements with the aircraft lessors. At that time, no disclosure statement was filed and no plan term sheet was shared by the Debtors.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A federal district court in Miami, FL, has ruled that former National Basketball Association star Shaquille O'Neal will have to face a lawsuit over his promotion of unregistered securities in the form of cryptocurrency tokens and that he was a "seller" of these unregistered securities.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC The question is whether a debtor's rejection of its agreement granting a license "terminates rights of the licensee that would survive the licensor's breach under applicable nonbankruptcy law."