We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-4 of 4

NAESB contract not protected by Bankruptcy Code safe harbor provisions

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 8 2007

The decision of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Hutson v. Smithfield Packing Co. (In re National Gas Distributors, LLC) poses potentially serious problems for parties trading gas under the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) base contract

Lehman Brothers ruling calls into question enforceability of cross-affiliate netting in bankruptcy

  • Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 18 2010

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York recently issued an opinion in the case of In re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. that significantly restricts the scope of setoff rights for energy traders and other participants in derivatives and forward commodity markets

Is triangular set-off enforceable under US laws?

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 29 2009

It is not uncommon to find in trading agreements triangular set-off provisions, also commonly referred to as “cross-affiliates” set-off clauses

National gas distributors case broadens swap safe harbor, or does it?

  • Dentons
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 13 2009

On Feb. 11, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued its opinion in Hutson v. E.I. Dupont de Nemours and Co. (In re National Gas Distributors), attempting, in a matter of first impression, to define "commodity forward agreement" for purposes of eligibility for protection under the safe harbor provisions of the Bankruptcy Code