IFLR is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Search results for

There are 25,965 results that match your search.25,965 results
  • Japanese companies face a growing threat from hostile takeovers. Andrew Crooke asks whether US-style corporate defence techniques can be applied in Tokyo
  • Steven Kargman continues his series of articles advising creditors and debtors on managing debt restructurings outside of developed insolvency regimes
  • Whitney Debevoise and David Orta of Arnold & Porter look at recent rulings on class action suits that followed Argentina's bond default, and argue that negotiated restructurings are the best way to resolve sovereign debt disputes
  • Ben Maiden reports from New York on how banks are preparing to cope with new accounting rules for special purpose entities
  • The EU official in charge of new legislation on European takeovers has criticized member states that are threatening the future of a draft directive aimed at making cross-border deals easier.
  • New definitions on how to change credit default swaps when a reference entity restructures are an improvement on the past, but not by much. Patrick Clancy of Shearman & Sterling LLP explains why not
  • Some asset-backed deals will still prove difficult under the UK's new insolvency regime despite broad exceptions to make securitizations feasible. Richard Ambery of Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw looks at how the treatment of loans to be securitized might change
  • Grant McCrea of Dewey Ballantine explains how France's Credit Agricole Indosuez successfully brought action in New York over disputed currency swap contracts with Russia's National Reserve Bank
  • The Fair Trade Commission of Korea (FTC) has amended its guidelines for filing an antitrust clearance/business combination report, with effect from July 1 2003.
  • On May 14 2003 a bill was submitted to Dutch Parliament that seeks to cancel the existing requirement of having to notify the debtors in the event of assignment of receivables under Dutch law. The explanatory memorandum to the proposal states as the principal reason for the proposed cancellation, the unforeseen development since the introduction of the requirement in 1992 of financial products that involve a transfer of a portfolio of receivables, in bulk and at the same time, as is the case in a securitization. In addition, the proposal intends to bring Dutch law in line with similar legislation in countries such as the UK, Belgium, France and Germany.