Intercreditor Agreements in Bankruptcy

November 20, 2012

 

An "intercreditor agreement" can be defined as an agreement that sets forth the relative rights, priorities and remedies among one or more lenders with respect to one or more common debtors. The enforceability of an intercreditor agreement in the context of a bankruptcy case is addressed in Section 510(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, which provides that “[a] subordination agreement is enforceable in a case under this title to the same extent that such agreement is enforceable under applicable nonbankruptcy law.” 11 U.S.C. § 510(a). In view of this seemingly clear, unambiguous language, it would seem that courts considering the enforceability of subordination agreements in the context of a bankruptcy case would only need to review and apply relevant nonbankruptcy law. However, whether an intercreditor agreement is a subordination agreement included within the protection of 11 U.S.C. § 510(a) is a valid question. In fact, earlier case law addressing the enforceability of a subordination agreement, or at least some of its provisions, in the context of a bankruptcy case concluded that the scope of Section 510(a) of the Bankruptcy Code is far narrower than meets the eye.

To read more about this topic, please see full article below

Download PDF


Legal Disclaimer:
No representation is made that the quality of services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Featured Attorneys

send article

TESTIMONIALS

  • “Their knowledge of the industry and ability to work with borrower's counsel in a number of difficult situations has been invaluable. The firm is very knowledgeable and brings a wealth of experience across multiple practices and disciplines. This provides a strong one-stop shopping experience when working with the firm.”

    -Chambers 2012

  • “A gentleman and a true trial attorney. He has a good way with the jury and comes across with sincerity and effectiveness.”

    -Chambers 2012

  • “He does a good job for his clients.”

    -Chambers 2012

  • “I think a lot of him. He is reasonable and logical. He is very good at getting the deal done and doing so in a collaborative way as opposed to adversarial. I always refer to him and believe he will take care of the client.”

    -Chambers 2012

  • “Good – very efficient, always call(s) me back. A great person who gives you what you need.”

    -Chambers 2012