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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 223

Play it again Samare inherited IRAs protected from creditors in bankruptcy?

  • Bryan Cave LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 1 2013

When the Fifth Circuit, in a case of first impression for that circuit and all of its sister circuit, last year ruled in In re Chilton, 11-40377

Pension priorities in Canada: an update for lenders

  • Bennett Jones LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • February 25 2014

Financiers and lenders to Canadian companies have become increasingly concerned about potential priorities of pension claims in Canada over the past

Third Circuit considering if the ‘police power’ exception to the automatic stay extends to the UK Pensions Regulator

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • December 19 2011

One exception to the otherwise far-reaching scope of the automatic stay is the “police power” exception, which permits a governmental unit to commence or continue an action or proceeding that is in furtherance of its police and regulatory powers (section 362(b)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code

UK Supreme Court upholds appeal by Nortel administrators on pension liabilities and the powers of the pensions regulator

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 24 2013

The Supreme Court has today ruled on the ranking of certain pension liabilities when issued to companies in administration or liquidation. In a

Ninth Circuit rules that withdrawal liability may be discharged in bankruptcy

  • Trucker Huss APC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 1 2013

In a decision that comes as welcome news to some employers, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that an employer that incurred

Delaware bankruptcy court finds bonus plan was created in the ordinary course of business

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 14 2012

On July 9, 2012, Judge Peter J. Walsh of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware issued a memorandum opinion (the "Opinion"), in the Blitz U.S.A. bankruptcy proceeding addressing whether an employee bonus plan is a transaction made in the ordinary course of business under 11 U.S.C. 363(c)(1

UK Supreme Court finds certain pension liabilities are not entitled to priority treatment, in Nortel and Lehman decisions

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 11 2013

In the matter of the Nortel Companies, the UK Supreme Court found that pension liabilities attributed to a company that arose prior to the

Supreme Court clarifies where the Pensions Regulator ranks in insolvency proceedings

  • CMS Cameron McKenna
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 24 2013

The Supreme Court has handed down its highly anticipated judgment in the joint Nortel NetworksLehman Brothers appeal. The administrators of Nortel

Sixth Circuit holds that supplemental unemployment compensation benefits are not ‘wages’ subject to FICA taxation

  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 10 2012

In an important recent decision, United States v Quality Stores, Inc., et al., in which Pepper represented the prevailing party, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that supplemental unemployment compensation benefits (SUB payments) paid by a bankrupt company to its former employees were not wages subject to taxation under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA

Pensions v. DIP charge: the continuing Timminco saga unions’ motion for leave to appeal denied

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • August 27 2012

The law in Canada concerning priorities between the statutory deemed trusts relating to pension plan contributions and certain pension fund shortfalls on the one hand, and court ordered charges in favour of DIP lenders on the other hand has been in a state of flux ever since the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal (the “OCA”) in Re Indalex