United States: On The Continuing Viability Of Debt-For-Debt Exchange Offers

In a recent decision in the Southern District of New York, the court addressed a challenge to a secured-for-unsecured debt exchange offer that raised and answered a host of questions on the potential vulnerability of offers of this type. In Waxman v. Cliffs Natural Resources (SDNY December 6, 2016), the court dealt with standing to pursue a challenge; TIA §316(b) after Marblegate and MeehanCombs/Caesars; the no-action clause and allegations of conflict of interest of the trustee; the remedies clause; and discrimination against non-QIBs. Ruling in favor of the issuer on all counts, the decision is a useful reminder of the continuing viability of debt exchange offers, notwithstanding the uncertainties sown by the recent TIA §316(b) cases and the pending Second Circuit appeal in Marblegate.


Cliff Natural Resources is a publicly traded mining and natural resources company. At the end of 2015, it had $2.898 billion in funded debt, including unsecured notes, first lien notes and second lien notes. The plaintiffs were holders of an unspecified number of notes in two unsecured classes. The court pointedly noted that each of the classes of notes held by the plaintiffs was issued in a registered public offering, whose prospectus supplement contained risk factors to the effect that the issuer was permitted to incur secured debt and that the unsecured notes would effectively be junior to any secured notes to the extent of the value of the relevant collateral.

In January 2016, Cliffs commenced an exchange offer for its unsecured notes, including the classes of notes held by the plaintiffs, that would substantially deleverage its balance sheet. In the exchange offer, which was open only to qualified institutional buyers (QIBs), the unsecured notes were exchanged for so-called secured 1.5L debt. The catch was the substantial reduction of the principal amount of the debt received in the exchange, which, depending on the issue, ranged from 35% to 61%. The plaintiffs, who evidently were not QIBs and therefore could not participate in the offer, challenged the exchange offer post-closing on a host of grounds.


At the outset, the court ruled that the plaintiffs did not even have standing to pursue their claims in federal court. Under the standards recited by the court, to have standing a plaintiff must show that it has suffered an injury that is actual or imminent and not conjectural or theoretical. The plaintiffs alleged that they were injured because, if the company were to enter bankruptcy in the future, their potential recovery may be less than if the 1.5L debt did not exist. Because there was no allegation that bankruptcy was imminent, the court held that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate an injury-in-fact. Moreover, the plaintiffs did not even allege that they would have accepted the offer had they been able to participate. (It also did not help the plaintiffs' cause that the value of their notes had appreciated between 500% and 600% in the six months or so since the closing of the exchange offer.) Notwithstanding its finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing, however, the court proceeded to dispose of each of the plaintiffs' claims on the merits as well.

TIA §316(b)

The court distinguished the recent TIA §316(b) case law, which, as is widely known, held that §316(b) prohibits transactions that in fact, if not legally, deprive nonparticipating holders of their ability to receive payment of principal and interest on their debt. Here, the court said, "none of the indicia of an involuntary, out-of-court pseudo-bankruptcy" were present. The exchange offer did not dispose of any assets. It did not amend the terms of any indenture. And it did not modify or remove any guaranty. Because the plaintiffs "were not left holding a 'worthless right to collect principal and interest,'" §316(b) was not implicated.

The No-Action Clause and Conflict of Interest

The plaintiffs did not comply with the no-action clause of their indentures, but instead asserted that compliance was excused. First, they argued that they could not comply with the no-action clause, with its typical 60-day demand period, because the exchange offer expired in 30 days. The court gave short shrift to this argument, as the lawsuit that the plaintiffs did bring was itself evidence that post-closing remedies could, in theory, be available to the trustee.

Second, the plaintiffs argued that the trustee was conflicted, because the trustee for their notes was also the trustee and collateral agent for the new 1.5L notes. As such, the plaintiffs argued, the trustee would not sue Cliffs because to do so would jeopardize its compensation. The court dismissed this claim as well, as there was no particularized allegation of how the trustee would financially benefit from a decision not to sue Cliffs or that the compensation was material to the trustee, such that it would be unable to effectively function as trustee for the notes held by the plaintiffs. Finally, the court said, even if the plaintiffs' demand on the trustee were excused, there was no excuse for failing to comply with the requirement of the no-action clause that claims must in the first instance be brought on behalf of 25% of the notes (and the plaintiffs apparently did not hold 25% of the outstanding notes of their respective issues).

Remedies Clause

As is typical, the indentures governing the notes held by the plaintiffs recited, "Notwithstanding any other provision in this Indenture, the Holder of any Security shall have the right, which is absolute and unconditional, to receive payment of the principal of and interest, if any, on such Security on the Stated Maturity or Stated Maturities ... such rights shall not be impaired without the consent of such Holder." The language mimics TIA §316(b), with the addition of the words "which is absolute and unconditional." This additional phrase, the court reasoned based on New York case law and the American Bar Foundation's Commentaries on Indentures, is intended to assure negotiability of indenture debt and prevents parties from raising affirmative defenses in collection actions. It does not provide any greater protection against an exchange transaction than §316(b) itself.

Discrimination Against Non-QIBs

The plaintiffs also claimed that the exchange offer violated the principle of good faith and fair dealing, essentially asking the court to read into the indenture provisions on change of control and partial redemption restrictions on the conduct of an exchange offer. The court would have nothing of it. In a pithy summary of the case law on strict construction of indentures, the court said, "In dealing with a company's bondholders, that which is not prohibited is permitted."

Of greater interest in this regard was the plaintiffs' contention that the exchange offer violated the implied good faith covenant because non-QIBs could not participate. Once again, the court was unpersuaded. While the plaintiffs pointed to other provisions of the indentures that mandated equal treatment in certain circumstances, the court drew a contrary inference from these provisions. The existence of these provisions, it said, showed that the potential for non-pro rata treatment was foreseen, and bondholders, if they had wanted, could have negotiated for protection in the circumstance of exchange offers as well. The QIB-only exchange offer appears to have offended neither the indentures nor the court.


With the uncertainty over out-of-court debt restructurings in the wake of the §316(b) cases, it is instructive that at least one federal district court has rebuffed an attempt to paint all debt restructurings, even where they partake of coercive and discriminatory elements, with the brush of Marblegate. Cliffs is apparently also the first case to hold expressly that exchange offers may be open only to QIBs, or presumably other limited classes of debt holders, absent an express provision to the contrary in the indenture. It remains to be seen how the Second Circuit will rule in Marblegate, but even after the ruling, certain questions on out-of-court debt restructurings are bound to persist. The Cliffs case should remain instructive on how courts will continue to deal with challenges to debt exchanges, particularly where issuers seek to delever at some distance from the zone of insolvency.

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.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
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
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
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.


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.


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