- Save
- Cite
-
Email this content
Share Link
Copy this link, or click below to email it to a friendEmail this contentor copy the link directly:The link was not copied. Your current browser may not support copying via this button.Link copied successfully
- Share This
Sign in
- Preliminary Material
- Main Text
- Part I United States
- 1 The Rise and Fall of Lehman Brothers
- 2 The Liquidation of Lehman Brothers Inc, the New York Brokerage of the Lehman Global Enterprise
- 2.01
- 2.02
- 2.03
- I Overview of a SIPA Liquidation and its Purposes
- II LBI’s Historical Background and the Story of its Collapse
- III Key Aspects of the LBI Liquidation
- 2.29
- A The emergency sale to Barclays
- B The control of information and records
- C Account transfers
- D The PIK note transfer
- E Atomization of foreign affiliates with different regulatory regimes
- F The general estate—LBI’s role as a major counterparty in markets for derivatives and other complex financial products
- IV Litigation over the Status of Claims by LBI’s Counterparties to Complex Financial Instruments
- V Reflections on the LBI Liquidation and Post-LBI Reforms
- 3 Lehman’s Derivative Portfolio: A Chapter 11 Perspective
- 4 Lessons from Lehman: Forcing A Settlement of Substantive Consolidation
- 5 Lehman Brothers and Equitable Subordination in Cross-Border Proceedings
- Part II United Kingdom
- 6 How Has English Law Coped with the Lehman Collapse?
- 7 Extended Liens
- 7.01
- 7.02
- 7.03
- 7.04
- 7.05
- I Nature and Purpose of Extended Liens
- II Conceptual Impossibility
- III Defining a Charge
- IV Questions Arising
- V Indivisibility
- VI The Consequences of Repayment of C by B
- VII The Consequences of Enforcement by A
- VIII Can A Extract a Price from C?
- IX The Treatment of an Extended Lien in B’s Insolvency
- X FSC v Lemma Europe Insurance Company Limited
- XI Conclusions
- 8 The Management and Distribution of LBIE’s Client Assets
- I Factual Background and the Legal Issues They Raised
- 8.01
- A Why did LBIE hold client assets?
- B Two estates in one administration: The trust estate
- C Trust law is the basic law for dealing with client assets
- D Trust property could be used to satisfy liabilities to the house
- E Trust property could be rehypothecated
- F Trust property needed to be recovered and was often held in mixed omnibus accounts
- G The insolvency was sudden and there were many unsettled or failed trades
- H Other people including affiliates had proprietary claims and wanted to be treated as customers too
- I Many assets were held at LBI
- J How could claims be finalized?
- K Information was incomplete and unreliable
- II Managing Both the Trust and the House Estate Side-By-Side
- III Solving the Legal Questions
- IV The Scheme of Arrangement
- V The CRA
- VI What Was the Problem with Client Money?
- VII What Were the Issues with the US Assets?
- VIII The Resolution of the LBI Client Asset Claim
- IX Affiliate Claims: Was LBIE a Trustee for its Affiliates?
- X The Aftermath: Reform and the SAR
- I Factual Background and the Legal Issues They Raised
- 9 Lessons of LBIE: Reuse and Rehypothecation
- I Introduction
- II Nature of Reuse of Securities Collateral
- III Prime Broker Rehypothecation
- IV Rehypothecation and the Failure of LBIE
- A The failure
- B Doctrine: the role of property rights
- C Process
- D Property remedies rejected as impracticable
- 9.104
- 1 Client money
- (a) LBIE CM litigation and treatment of under-segregation
- (b) Administrators reject tracing
- (c) Clients release CME
- (d) Use of credit derivatives
- 2 Client securities
- E Practical problems
- F Central issue: complexity of encumbrance key factor in delays
- G Impact of rehypothecation
- H Compare US experience
- I Key role of securities finance in failure
- V Post-Crisis Client Asset Measures
- VI Securities Finance and the Reuse of Securities Collateral
- 9.200
- 9.201
- 9.202
- 9.203
- 9.204
- 9.205
- A Origination transactions: reuse into the shadow
- B Market transactions: Reuse within the shadow
- VII Repo Run
- VIII Post-Crisis Systemic Measures
- IX Transactional Integrity
- X Conclusions
- 10 The English Law Treatment of Lehman’s Derivatives Positions
- 11 The Scope and Application of the Anti-Deprivation Rule
- I Introduction: What Is the Anti-Deprivation Rule About?
- II How Did the Anti-Deprivation Issue Arise in the Lehman Litigation?
- III The Contrasting UK and US Approaches
- IV The Crucial Elements of the UK Pari Passu and Anti-Deprivation Rules
- V Do These Rules Apply in an Administration?
- VI Controversies and Uncertainties
- VII Pari Passu: Defining the Insolvent’s Assets or Distributing Them?
- VIII Which Rule? Can the Same Transaction Offend Both Rules?
- IX The Good Faith Requirement in the Anti-Deprivation Rule
- X Anti-Deprivation: A Relevant Deprivation or Not?
- 11.64
- 11.65
- 11.66
- A What question must be answered?
- B The forfeited assets were paid for by the preferred creditor
- C ‘Flawed assets’
- D Late insertion of the insolvency trigger
- E Flawed assets: forfeiture of an asset or defining a limited asset?
- F Forfeiting an asset or suspending its enjoyment?
- G Enjoying a new asset rather than forfeiting an old one
- H Leases and licences terminated on insolvency
- I Forfeiture of an asset and termination of a contract
- XI Conclusion
- Part III Europe
- 12 The Use of a Composition Plan as a Valuation and Distribution Framework
- I Introduction
- II Parties in the Custody Chain and Creditor Rights in Dutch Insolvency Proceedings
- III Submission and Admission of Insolvency Claims
- IV The Use of a Composition Plan as a Valuation and Distribution Framework
- A Pursuing a consensual deal
- B General description of the procedure for the adoption of a composition plan
- C Solicitation of voting instructions
- D The voting procedure
- E Confirmation of the composition plan by the court
- F Cram down mechanism
- G Governance of LBT in voluntary liquidation
- V Conclusions
- 13 The Valuation of LBT Notes: An Application of Dutch Insolvency Law
- I Introduction
- II Procedure Applied by the LBT Bankruptcy Trustees
- III General Legal Valuation Principles Applicable in the LBT Proceedings
- IV General Economic Aspects of the Valuation of LBT Notes
- A Fair value as a valuation framework
- B Application of fair value to the LBT Notes
- C Discount rates and the issuer credit spread
- D Liquidated LBT Notes that mature after the 12 Month Anniversary Date
- E Unliquidated LBT Notes that mature after the 12 Month Anniversary Date
- F Treatment of post-commencement interest
- V Recommendations for Future Law Reform
- VI Conclusions
- 14 Derivatives in Cross-Border Insolvency Proceedings
- 12 The Use of a Composition Plan as a Valuation and Distribution Framework
- Part I United States
- Further Material
- [3.239.119.61]
- 3.239.119.61
