Scribd
Upload
22 views3 pages

2005 ISDA Conference Litigation Update

This document summarizes two recent court cases: 1) Oakley Inc. v. Animal Limited addressed the interplay between EU directives and UK legislation regarding patents. The case is on appeal and creates uncertainty around various directives. 2) In re Enron Corp. v. Bear, Stearns concerned whether transactions deemed void under state fraudulent conveyance law can still be protected under bankruptcy code sections 546(e) or 546(g) regarding securities, forward, and swap agreements. The International Swaps and Derivatives Association filed an amicus brief.

Uploaded by

swinki3
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
22 views3 pages

2005 ISDA Conference Litigation Update

This document summarizes two recent court cases: 1) Oakley Inc. v. Animal Limited addressed the interplay between EU directives and UK legislation regarding patents. The case is on appeal and creates uncertainty around various directives. 2) In re Enron Corp. v. Bear, Stearns concerned whether transactions deemed void under state fraudulent conveyance law can still be protected under bankruptcy code sections 546(e) or 546(g) regarding securities, forward, and swap agreements. The International Swaps and Derivatives Association filed an amicus brief.

Uploaded by

swinki3
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

I

2005 ISDA Regional Member


Conference

Litigation Update
Oakley v. Animal
Enron v. Bear, Stearns
September 28,2005
Joshua D. Cohn, Partner
Allen 8 Overy

Oakley Inc. v. Animal Limited


English High Court, Chancery Division - Patents Court
February 17,2005

- On appeal

- Issue - Interplay of European Union directives and UK


legislative process

- Present Impact - uncertainty regarding propriety of


implementationof a variety of directives, including Collateral
Directive.

test.ppt 1
I

In re Enron Corp. v. Bear, Stearns, 323


B.R. 857 (B.R. S.D.N.Y)
- Posture: Motion for Leave to File Appeal (interlocutory
appeal sought from denial of motion to dismiss)

- ISDA and Other Trade Associations as Amici

ERY

If a transaction is void under state fraudulent conveyance


law, can a transfer under it be protected by section 546(e)
(regarding securities contracts or forward contracts) or
546(g) (regarding swap agreements)?

- Not commonly used"?

test.ppt 2
f

Bankruptcy Code Section 546(e)


"Notwithstanding sections 544, 545,547,548(a)(i)(B) and
548(b)of this title, the trustee may not avoid a transfer
that is a .... settlement payment ... made by or to a ...
forward contract merchant [or] stockbroker ... except
; under section 548(a)(l)(A)of this title".
Bankruptcy Code Section 741(8)
"[Slettlement payment means a [list of various types of
settlement payment1] a final settlement payment, or any
other similar payment commonly used in the securities

IS D A n p 9 ( s e c t i o n
101, tarorward cmtractr. is laigdy paratlei)

test.ppt 3

You might also like