Treatment of Make-Whole Premiums in Bankruptcy: A Bondholder Perspective
Courts have generally found that make-whole provisions do not provide for the payment of unmatured interest, nor are they unenforceable liquidated damages provisions. It would behoove the court in 'Ultra Petroleum' to continue the precedent on these issues, because failure to do so would call into question the ever-important principle that when evaluating documents governed by New York law, courts will generally defer to the mutual intent of the parties as manifested within the four corners of the document.
September 26, 2017 at 12:00 AM
7 minute read
A case currently before the U.S. Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of Texas, In re Ultra Petroleum, No. 16-3302 (Bankr. S.D. Tx. filed April 29, 2016), has raised again the issue of how make-whole payments due from a borrower to bondholders, pursuant to the terms of credit documents governed by New York law, should be treated in the event of the borrower's bankruptcy. Because the court's decision on the make-whole payment issue in Ultra Petroleum will decide the fate of $200 million, this issue may continue to be litigated on appeal regardless of the bankruptcy court's decision.
What Is Make-Whole?
Make-whole provisions are a yield protection mechanism that allows bondholders to rely on a guaranteed rate of return on their investment, particularly for long-term, fixed-rate investments. These provisions provide that upon the repayment or acceleration of a loan prior to its intended maturity (whether via certain voluntary prepayments, upon an event of default such as the filing of a petition for bankruptcy, or otherwise), a certain sum shall automatically become due and owing to the bondholders. The amount of this make-whole payment is generally calculated with respect to a formula that represents the amount the bondholders were owed over the remaining term of the investment, discounted to present value. Notably, borrowers may benefit from this yield protection mechanism by obtaining more favorable interest rates or fees than would otherwise be available absent such a yield protection mechanism.
There are several theories traditionally advanced by a debtor's counsel in bankruptcy controversies that argue that make-whole payments should be disallowed. Specifically, those arguments center around make-whole payments constituting (1) “unmatured interest” disallowed under 11 U.S.C. §502(b)(2), and (2) unenforceable liquidated damages. This article will evaluate the case law and various arguments with respect to the validity of make-whole payments, and will argue that make-whole payments should be allowable in bankruptcy because (1) make-whole payments are not unmatured interest, (2) make-whole provisions are not unenforceable liquidated damages provisions, and (3) deferring to the plain language of make-whole payment provisions increases predictability, a core tenet of New York commercial law, and thereby benefits bondholders and borrowers alike.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: For Big Law Names, Shorter is Sweeter
- 2Wine, Dine and Grind (Through the Weekend): Summer Associates Thirst For Experience in 'Real Matters'
- 3The 'Biden Effect' on Senior Attorneys: Should I Stay or Should I Go?
- 4'That's Disappointing': Only 11% of MDL Appointments Went to Attorneys of Color in 2023
- 5'You Are Not Alone': 120 Sex Assault Victims Plan to Sue Sean 'Diddy' Combs
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250