Publication
Global rules on foreign direct investment (FDI)
Cross-border acquisitions and investments increasingly trigger foreign direct investment (FDI) screening requirements.
Global | Publication | October 19, 2017
Bankruptcy lawyers in our New York office recently obtained a decision from the North Carolina Court of Appeals reversing a summary judgment order that had been entered against our client, Friday Investments. Sam Kohn argued the appeal.
Friday is the owner of a large mall in Charlotte, North Carolina, and the lessor under a lease to Bally Total Fitness of the Mid-Atlantic, which is guaranteed by its parent, Bally Total Fitness Holding Corporation. Bally Mid-Atlantic breached its obligations under the lease, and Friday sought recovery from Bally Holding as guarantor.
In the trial court, Bally Holding argued that notwithstanding the assumption by the Bally debtors of the underlying lease in its 2009 bankruptcy proceeding, its obligations under the guaranty had been discharged by the Bally debtors’ Chapter 11 plan. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment for Bally Holding, reading the provisions of the plan that consolidated all of the Bally debtors for distribution purposes to include the elimination of intercompany guaranties.
On appeal, the bankruptcy team argued that the express terms of the Bally debtors’ plan provided for the continuation of the guaranty post-bankruptcy, and in the alternative that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the guaranty was required to be maintained, notwithstanding the plan’s consolidation provisions. By a two-to-one margin, the North Carolina Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment, and remanded for further consideration of the effect of the plan’s consolidation provisions and whether the guaranty was required to be maintained under the plan. Notably, the dissenting judge would have remanded with instructions to grant summary judgment in favor of our client, reading the plan’s consolidation provisions not to have any substantive effect and that Bally Holding’s guaranty was not discharged by the Bally debtors’ plan.
Publication
Cross-border acquisitions and investments increasingly trigger foreign direct investment (FDI) screening requirements.
Publication
On February 2, 2024, the Belgian Presidency of the Council of the European Union confirmed that the Committee of Permanent Representatives had signed the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Regulation, referred to as the AI Act. Approval by the EU Parliament followed on 13 March 2024, and the AI Act is likely to appear in the EU’s Official Journal around May 2024. The AI Act aims to establish a stringent legal framework governing the development, marketing, and utilisation of artificial intelligence within the region, thereby marking a significant advancement in the regulation of this burgeoning domain.
Publication
The EU’s Artificial Intelligence Regulation, commonly referred to as the AI Act, is expected to come into force during the summer of 2024 (the AI Act). The AI Act will be the first comprehensive legal framework for the use and development of artificial intelligence (AI), and is intended to ensure that AI systems developed and used in the EU are safe, transparent, traceable, non-discriminatory and environmentally friendly.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023