Allen & Overy Sides With Pari Passu Pessimists

The global law intelligence unit of Allen & Overy, the London based global law firm, has prepared a white paper on the pari passu clause and the Collective action clauses provide that minorities are bound by the decision of a super-majority, typically either two-thirds or three-quarters. If that majority agrees to accept an exchange of bonds, the hold-out tactic is excluded.

But collective action clauses have their weaknesses. Holdout creditors can buy out a blocking quantity in a small issue. Few CACs at present “contain aggregation clauses allowing overall majorities across all issues to bind a single dissenting minority in one issue,” so by blocking agreement in a small issue, holdouts can “torpedo the whole process.”

Digression on Remedy
The white paper also raises the possibility that U.S. courts will “order specific performance by means of injunctions preventing discriminatory payments, with penalty of contempt of court if not complied with.” There is just a single brief reference in the white paper to that possibility, and that is as close as it gets to grappling with what is in fact the Big Issue in the continuing litigation of the issue in New York: remedy.

BNY Mellon, a non-party appellant, is making the case that its receipt and distribution of funds does not rise to the level of making it “active concert and participation” with Argentina’s defiance of court orders. After all, rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure says that a court injunction binds the parties before the court, their officers agents, employees, etc., and “other persons who are in active concert or participation” with the parties.

How much bite will the Second Circuit’s decision have? That depends in large part upon how its injunctions are construed, and especially upon whether that Rule 65 language is taken to include financial services firms that are simply seeking to carry out contractual obligations to a party when those obligations themselves were incurred prior to the injunction, the sort of thing that BNY Mellon in its briefs calls “passive conduct.”

Back to the White Paper
The Allen & Overy paper also reflects on the significance of New York law in the global picture. New York law is one of the “two great legal ‘public utilities’” in this area – English law is the other. If English courts take a different view from that of the Second Circuit on behalf of New York, this “could lead to undesirable arbitrage and destabilizing forum-shopping and litigation.”

The law firm advises market participants to be more particular about the language used going forward “and to introduce appropriate qualifications.” That would seem to be a key point.

Get The News You Want

Read market moving news with a personalized feed of stocks you care about.

Get The App

My own guess, again, is that the markets will adjust to the Second Circuit’s reading and that the disruption will be less severe than contemporary pessimists imagine. First, they will adjust because new contracts will reflect the new understandings. Second, as to existing contracts, the alternative of English law (even with the possibility of arbitrage) will prove a mitigating not an aggravating factor. Third, the appellate courts will probably back away from any overly-draconian remedial rulings.

The weather report for coming weeks does not say “falling chunks of sky.”

Written By: AllAboutAlpha