Core Viewpoint - The Supreme Court's refusal to hear Hertz's appeal leaves the company liable for over $270 million in interest payments to former bondholders following its bankruptcy reorganization [1] Group 1: Legal Background - The legal dispute began in 2021 when Hertz emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy, with bondholders claiming they were underpaid and seeking full interest payments [2] - Hertz contended that the bankruptcy code prevented the accrual of "unmatured interest" after filing for bankruptcy, asserting that bondholders received their entitled amounts based on "allowed claims" [3] Group 2: Court Decisions - In September 2024, bondholders successfully appealed a bankruptcy court decision, with the case reviewed by the federal Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit [3] - The appeals court highlighted that Hertz had sufficient funds post-reorganization, having distributed $1.1 billion to shareholders, which was four times the amount of interest sought by bondholders [4] - The majority opinion emphasized the "absolute priority rule," mandating that bondholders must be paid in full before any distributions to junior shareholders [5] Group 3: Company Response - Hertz expressed disappointment with the appeals court's ruling, arguing that it had fulfilled all legal obligations to unsecured noteholders by repaying 100% of the principal and interest owed at the time of bankruptcy, along with post-petition interest at the federal judgment rate [6]

A new out-of-court route aims to speed up settlements of genuine failures. A former chair of a bankruptcy watchdog reckons that these amendments will fulfil India’s bankruptcy code’s “intended purpose”. About time https://t.co/JUjmCebkL3 ...

Soon after India’s bankruptcy code was introduced in 2016, it was hailed as the end of the “defaulter’s paradise”. Nearly a decade on, the results are mixed https://t.co/1jVePliv67 ...