United States: The Enforceability Of Independent Director Or Independent Member Provisions In A Bankruptcy-Remote Entity's Organizational Documents

Last Updated: November 4 2016
Article by Bruce A. Wilson

In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC, 547 B.R. 899 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2016) and In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC, No. 16-11247, 2016 WL 3185576 (Bankr. D. Del. June 3, 2016)

Two bankruptcy courts recently have issued opinions that invalidated "golden share" provisions in a bankruptcy-remote entity's organizational documents. See In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC, 547 B.R. 899 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2016); and In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC, No. 16- 11247, 2016 WL 3185576 (Bankr. D. Del. June 3, 2016). In both cases the bankruptcy-remote limited liability company at issue had provisions in its operating agreement requiring the consent of a special member as a condition to filing bankruptcy, in both cases the bankruptcy-remote entity filed bankruptcy and in both cases the court declined to enforce the operating agreement provisions requiring the consent of the special member to the bankruptcy filing.

Background

Although waivers by debtors of a right to file bankruptcy are unenforceable as being contrary to the public policy of permitting persons and corporate entities to take advantage of bankruptcy, the use of "bankruptcy-remote" or "special-purpose" entities with an independent director (in the case of a corporation) or an independent member (in the case of a limited liability company) have become fairly common. In many loan or similar transactions, a creditor or other party in the transaction may require, as a condition to making a loan or entering into the transaction, that the debtor or counterparty be organized as a bankruptcy-remote entity. Such an entity is typically a newly created entity and its organizational documents limit its purpose to the particular transaction at issue and require that such entity have an independent director or an independent member. The equity interest held by an independent member is often referred to as a "golden share" or "blocking share" and is often a non-economic interest. The organizational document of such a bankruptcy-remote entity will prohibit certain material actions, including a voluntary bankruptcy filing, without obtaining the unanimous consent of its equity holders and the consent of the independent director or independent member.

A creditor or other participant in a transaction may require a bankruptcy-remote entity to be organized in order to isolate certain assets serving as collateral into an entity whose bankruptcy is a remote possibility, rather than assuming the credit risk of the bankruptcy-remote entity's parent company. The existence of a bankruptcy-remote entity would also permit such a creditor, if necessary, to exercise remedies solely against the bankruptcy-remote entity and its assets, rather than possibly becoming entangled in a bankruptcy case filed by or against the bankruptcy-remote entity's parent company. In many transactions, the use of a bankruptcy-remote entity also increases the economic benefit to such entity and its parent through a lower rate of interest based on a reduced bankruptcy risk, through a higher credit rating in transactions that are rated, or through the participation of parties in the transaction that would not otherwise participate if the parent company were the debtor or counterparty.

The nature of particular independent director or independent member provisions may differ depending on the parties and the transaction. In many cases the independent director or independent member is required by the organizational documents to be an independent or disinterested third party. In other cases the position of independent director or independent member is held by the bankruptcy-remote entity's principal or only creditor.

In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC

In the In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC case, BCL-Bridge Funding LLC ("BCL") made a loan to Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC, a Michigan limited liability company (the "Michigan SPE"). After a default on the loan, the parties entered into a forbearance agreement requiring, among other things, an amendment of the Michigan SPE's operating agreement to add a "special member" provision. The provision required the Michigan SPE to have a special member and to obtain the consent of the special member as a condition to a voluntary bankruptcy filing. The provision also provided that the special member had "no duty or obligation to give any consideration to any interest of or factors affecting the [Michigan SPE] or the Members." In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC, 547 B.R. at 904. The special member held no economic interest in the Michigan SPE. In the transaction at issue in the In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC case, BCL itself served as the special member. In addition, the court also noted that BCL was an over-secured creditor of the Michigan SPE.

The Michigan SPE subsequently filed bankruptcy with the consent of all of its members, except the consent of BCL as the special member. BCL filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that the Michigan SPE did not follow corporate formalities and was not authorized by its operating agreement to file bankruptcy.

The bankruptcy court declined to dismiss the bankruptcy case of the Michigan SPE. The court did not reject the concept of a special member or golden share in its entirety. However, the court found that the special member provision at issue in the Michigan SPE's operating agreement was invalid and unenforceable because it failed to require the special member to comply with its fiduciary obligations under Michigan law. The court stated:

The essential playbook for a successful blocking director structure is this: the director must be subject to normal director fiduciary duties and therefore in some circumstances vote in favor of a bankruptcy filing, even if it is not in the best interests of the creditor that they were chosen by.

BCL's playbook was, unfortunately, missing this page.

Id. at 913. The court further explained that under the Michigan limited liability company act, members of a limited liability company have a duty to consider the interests of the limited liability company, not only their own interests. In the court's view, the special member provision at issue was invalid because it eliminated any obligation of BCL, as the special member, to consider the interests of the Michigan SPE, but instead purported to allow BCL to consider only its own interests. Thus, the court stated that the special member provision at issue:

expressly eliminates the only redeeming factor that permits the blocking director/member construct. The [operating agreement] provision that BCL's consent was required in order for the [Michigan SPE] to petition for bankruptcy relief is, therefore, unenforceable, both as a matter of Michigan corporate governance and bankruptcy law.

Id. at 914.

In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC

The facts of the In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC case are very similar to those presented in In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC. In In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC, EIG Energy Fund XV-A, L.P. ("EIG") made a loan to Intervention Energy Holding, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the "Delaware SPE"). After a default on the loan, the parties entered into a forbearance agreement requiring, among other things, an amendment of the Delaware SPE's operating agreement. The operating agreement was amended to issue an equity interest in the Delaware SPE to EIG, which was one of 22,000,001 common units issued by the Delaware SPE, in exchange for a $1.00 capital contribution by EIG. The amendment also added a provision requiring the approval of all holders of the Delaware SPE's common units, including EIG, as a condition to a voluntary bankruptcy filing by the Delaware SPE.

The Delaware SPE subsequently filed bankruptcy with the consent of all of its common unit holders, except EIG as holder of its single common unit. EIG filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that the Delaware SPE did not follow corporate formalities and was not authorized by its operating agreement to file bankruptcy. In response, the Delaware SPE cited the In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC case summarized above. The Delaware SPE asserted that the golden share provision in its operating agreement should be invalid because the provision gave EIG the ability to block a voluntary bankruptcy filing and, in effect, failed to maintain the fiduciary duty of equity owners of a Delaware limited liability company to consider the best interests of the Delaware limited liability company.

The bankruptcy court declined to dismiss the bankruptcy case of the Delaware SPE. However, unlike the court in In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC, the court in In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC did not assess the scope of a member's duties under the Delaware limited liability company act, whether a Delaware limited liability company could modify such duties in its operating agreement, or whether the golden share provision at issue was consistent with applicable state law duties. Instead, the court denied EIG's motion to dismiss on federal public policy grounds.

After summarizing the "well settled principal" that a waiver of the right to file bankruptcy is void as against public policy, the court stated, "Yet, to contract away the right to seek bankruptcy relief is precisely what both parties here have attempted to accomplish." In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC, 2016 WL 3185576, at *5. The court reasoned:

A provision in a limited liability company governance document obtained by contract, the sole purpose and effect of which is to place into the hands of a single, minority equity holder the ultimate authority to eviscerate the right of that entity to seek federal bankruptcy relief, and the nature and substance of whose primary relationship with the debtor is that of creditor—not equity holder—and which owes no duty to anyone but itself in connection with [a Delaware SPE's] decision to seek federal bankruptcy relief, is tantamount to an absolute waiver of that right, and, even if arguably permitted by state law, is void as contrary to federal public policy. Under the undisputed facts before me, to characterize the [applicable provision] here as anything but an absolute waiver by the [Delaware SPE] of its right to seek federal bankruptcy relief would directly contradict the unequivocal intention of EIG to reserve for itself the decision of whether the [Delaware SPE] should seek federal bankruptcy relief.

Id. at *6 (citations omitted).

Last, when presented with decisions in other jurisdictions that arguably favored the enforceability of golden share provisions, the court either distinguished such cases from the facts presented in In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC or simply stated "I disagree." Id. at *6 fn.25.

Conclusion

It is important to recognize that the holders of the "golden shares" in both the In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC and In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC decisions were creditors of the related debtor. The court in In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC, in the quote set forth above, was careful to limit its decision to those facts. Thus, neither case addressed the enforceability of a provision in a special-purpose entity's organizational documents appointing an independent or disinterested third party as an independent director or independent member and which does not purport to limit the duties of such independent director or independent member solely to the consideration of creditor's interests. However, even if a court were to uphold the enforceability of a golden share or independent director provision, whether a creditor or an independent third party is the independent member or independent director, the court may still review and require the actions of the independent member or independent director to be consistent with its state law fiduciary duties under the circumstances.1

It also may be worth noting that neither case examined the duties of an equity holder under applicable state law, or whether the golden share provision at issue was consistent with such duties, in the context of an insolvent debtor. The court in the In re Lake Michigan Beach Pottawattamie Resort LLC described the creditor's loan as being over-secured, and the court in In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC did not address applicable state law duties of a member of a limited liability company based on the facts presented and its view of public policy considerations. Thus, the cases potentially may be distinguishable from an instance in which a debtor is insolvent and the duties of its members or directors under applicable state law may include consideration of creditor interests. State law will becomes insolvent or, in some cases, which is in a zone of insolvency.2

In both of the foregoing cases the equity interest of the creditor in the related debtor was either a non-economic interest or a de minimus interest and was viewed by the respective court as intended solely for the purpose of blocking a bankruptcy filing by the debtor. A different result could possibly be reached if a lender to a special-purpose entity or other debtor held a more significant economic equity interest in a debtor, as an investment or for a purpose other than to block a bankruptcy filing, which equity interest is separate from the lender's loan. In such a case, it may be possible for a creditor to argue that its equity interest and related right to consent to a bankruptcy filing are not solely intended to block a bankruptcy filing of the debtor, but relate to its equity investment in the debtor.3

Footnotes

1 See, e.g., In re Gen. Growth Props., Inc., 409 B.R. 43 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2009) (holding that replacement of independent directors of special-purpose entities on the eve of a bankruptcy filing with directors experienced in the applicable business and who voted in favor of bankruptcy did not constitute a bad faith filing or warrant dismissal).

2 A recent example of such a case is In re AWTR Liquidation, Inc., 2016 548 B.R. 300 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016) (holding that the scope of duties of a corporation's directors includes the interests of creditors upon the corporation's insolvency).

3 See, e.g., In re Global Ship Sys., LLC, 391 B.R. 193, 199-203 (S.D. Ga. 2007) (examining a creditor who also held a 20% equity interest in a debtor and the possibility that such creditor could "wear two hats").

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
Troutman Sanders LLP
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
Troutman Sanders LLP
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions