The Legal Status of “Aircraft Component Parts”: Dutch Air Law Under Debate
by Aster van de Velden
Aircraft component parts are typically leased. What happens if these parts are attached onto a Dutch registered aircraft that is owned either by the lessee or by another party?
Ancillary Proceedings: Should the Tail Wag the Dog?
Select Examples of Broad Ancillary Relief in Canadian and U.S. Insolvency Courts
by Nancy A. Mitchell, Thomas J. Weber and Collin B. Williams, Greenberg Traurig LLP; and Edward A. Sellers, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
The coordination of international insolvencies has been a challenging aspect of legal practice for many decades. Varying treatment of debtor/creditor interests between jurisdictions and the sovereignty of nations (and their courts) have demanded creative approaches from the bench and bar in order to equitably deal with the aftermath of an international business failure.
Historically, two main approaches emerged to deal with international insolvencies: the territorialist approach and the universalist approach. As its name suggests, the territorialist approach emphasized the application of local laws in ancillary bankruptcy proceedings over the totality of an insolvency case. In contrast, the universalist approach generally sought to centralize proceedings in one forum, typically in the country where the debtor’s primary operations were based, while permitting ancillary proceedings in other jurisdictions to effectuate the orderly administration of assets. Generally, the approaches embodied under §304 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Code”) and Section 18.6 of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”) favor the universalist approach. As such, the overarching principle applied in ancillary proceedings involving interests straddling the two nations has been that of harmonization and integration with the main proceedings regardless of whether Canadian– or U.S.–based.
In order to assist in solving numerous and unanticipated problems, lawmakers wrote both §304 of the Code and §18.6 of the CCAA fairly broadly. In other words, they were designed to provide courts with flexible frameworks in which to address many different circumstances raised in the context of international insolvencies. As a result of this approach, bench and bar alike have a great deal of latitude in fashioning relief in both Canadian– and U.S.–based ancillary proceedings. Select examples of the breadth of relief available in North American ancillary proceedings are set out below.
Join ABI in London for the International Insolvency Symposium
The American Bankruptcy Institute’s first program in Europe will bring together top international speakers to discuss the issues of the moment in international insolvency and restructuring. One of London’s premier hotels, The Savoy, provides a first class and memorable venue for the conference. The conference has attracted significant support from the industry’s top professional firms in the United States and Europe.