Not a member yet? Free Membership for Qualified Investors and Industry Participants
Easily Customize Content to Match Your Investment Preferences
Breaking News 24/7/365
Alternative Investment Listings & LeaderBoards
Industry Research, Due Diligence, Videos, Webinars, Events, Press Releases, Market Commentary, Newsletters, Fact Sheets,Presentations, Investment Mandates, Video PitchBooks & More! Company Directory
AUM Accelerator Program (designed for investment managers)
Over 450K+ Industry Headlines, Posts and Updates
ALL ALPHAMAVEN CONTENT IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.CONTENT POSTED BY MEMBERS DOES NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE OPINION OR BELIEFS OF ALPHAMAVEN AND HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED BY ALPHAMAVEN.PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS.THIS IS NOT A SOLICITATION FOR INVESTMENT.THE MATERIAL PROVIDED HEREIN IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER TO SELL OR A SOLICITATION OF AN OFFER TO BUY ANY INTERESTS OF ANY FUND OR ANY OTHER SECURITIES.ANY SUCH OFFERINGS CAN BE MADE ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE INVESTMENT'S PRIVATE PLACEMENT MEMORANDUM.PRIOR TO INVESTING, INVESTORS ARE STRONGLY URGED TO REVIEW CAREFULLY THE PRIVATE PLACEMENT MEMORANDUM (INCLUDING THE RISK FACTORS DESCRIBED THEREIN), THE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AND THE SUBSCRIPTION DOCUMENTS, TO ASK SUCH QUESTIONS OF THE INVESTMENT MANAGER AS THEY DEEM APPROPRIATE, AND TO DISCUSS ANY PROSPECTIVE INVESTMENT IN THE FUND WITH THEIR LEGAL AND TAX ADVISERS IN ORDER TO MAKE AN INDEPENDENT DETERMINATION OF THE SUITABILITY AND CONSEQUENCES OF AN INVESTMENT. ALPHAMAVEN

Two Buyers Purchase Culligan Québec and Granby Backed by National
Bank Private Investment - Canada NewsWire

Major players in the wastewater treatment equipment market are Suez, 3M, GE Water, Culligan International Company, DOW Water & Process Solutions, Pentair Plc, Aquatech International, Danaher Corporation, Ecolab, and Chembond Chemicals Limited. June 10, 2022 09:14 ET
Lyon,  FRANCE
New York, June  10, 2022  (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "Wastewater Treatment Equipment Global Market Report 2022" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p06284603/?utm_source=GNW
The global wastewater treatment equipment market is expected to grow from $30.17 billion in 2021 to $31.49 billion in 2022 at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.4%. The market is expected to grow to $36.85 billion in 2026 at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.0%. The wastewater treatment equipment market consists of sales of wastewater treatment equipment and related services. Wastewater treatment equipment is used to treat solid, liquid, gaseous, or radioactive substances, remediation, and processing of effluent wastewater and waste matter from households, businesses, and other organizations. The main equipment in wastewater treatment equipment is filtration equipment, membrane equipment, thermal distillation equipment and evaporators, and disinfection equipment.Membrane equipment is a barrier in water treatment that allows water to pass through while preventing undesired substances from passing through as well. The application areas of wastewater treatment equipment include municipal, and industrial with primary, secondary, and tertiary processes that are smooth and textured. Asia Pacific was the largest region in the wastewater treatment equipment market in 2021.Western Europe was the second largest region in the wastewater treatment equipment market. The regions covered in this report are Asia-Pacific, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, North America, South America, Middle East, and Africa. The wastewater treatment equipment market is being driven by a rapidly increasing disposal of wastewater from the industrial as well as residential sectors.The high quantity of wastewater being disposed of is increasing the necessity to treat the water using wastewater treatment equipment. According to a research study published by the European Environment Agency (EEA), the percentage of the residential population disposing of wastewater in northern European countries is always above 80 % out of which more than 70 % received tertiary wastewater treatment.Furthermore, in central European countries, the proportion of the population connected to urban wastewater treatment in southern, south-eastern, and eastern Europe is 97% out of which 75% are receiving tertiary wastewater treatment. According to the international water association (IWA)’s wastewater report, the Philippines accounted for about a million cubic meters of wastewater disposed of every year by industrial sectors in the Manila Bay and Laguna Lake. These factors are driving the wastewater treatment equipment market. The wastewater treatment equipment market is being restrained by high installation and operational costs of the equipment, leading to indirect investment.The wastewater treatment apparatus is equipped with a sophisticated programmable logic controller (PLC) system and instrumentation system that increase the overall equipment costs and energy consumption costs. Further, the high energy consumption of wastewater treatment equipment leads to a high cost of operation and maintenance due to a large amount of sludge generated. For instance, most wastewater generated in Sri Lanka is untreated, with about 65.3 million liters/day of domestic wastewater left untreated in the capital city of Colombo. According to a report by Black & Veatch on the Wastewater industry, managing capital costs and operational costs are the major challenges of the wastewater industry. Also, according to a report by the UN (United Nations) on water quality, 80% of sewage in developing countries is discharged untreated directly into water bodies, and industries across the world dump an estimated 300-400 MT of polluted waste in water bodies every year to reduce treatment costs. For instance, in Finland, an initial investment of 7000 to 10000 euros is required to install a modern on-site wastewater treatment plant. Further, the operating costs for the same are also high as they comprise the chemical, electricity, and service agreement cost. The increasing use of Internet of Things (IoT) sensors is the latest trend in the wastewater treatment equipment market.The Internet of Things (IoT) is a network of physical devices that communicate over the internet. The environmental sensors measure pollution-causing particles in air and water, thereby monitoring air or water quality.It also senses radiations and hazardous chemicals in the environment. A majority of the organizations that function in the water industry depend on the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems to monitor the water distribution systems.The use of IoT in water systems uses smart sensors that detect information about the water quality, temperature changes, pressure changes, and potentially any chemical leaks. For instance, companies in the water treatment industry such as Biz4solutions company, are providing innovative solutions for effective wastewater management and water testing analytics through IoT systematic water management to manage water recycling, reduce the number of water leakages, and efficiently manage wastewater. The wastewater treatment equipment market in the USA is regulated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).The EPA has established standards for secondary treatment of wastewater for publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). These standards have certain technology-based requirements for municipal wastewater treatment.The EPA specified a list of products approved state-wise for onsite treatment of wastewater. Governments globally are continuously investing in environmental regulations and policies to be implemented by businesses, manufacturing companies, and even households.The US government passed the Frank R.
Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act specifying guidelines for companies in the chemicals industry for proper management, storage, and disposal of mercury to preserve state environmental authorities related to air, water, waste disposal, and treatment. Further, the EPA also specifies national standards for decentralized wastewater treatment. In addition, regulatory bodies such as National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) formulate and develop onsite wastewater treatment standards. The countries covered in the wastewater treatment equipment market are Australia, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Russia, South Korea, UK, and USA.

Wastewater Treatment Equipment Global Market Report 2022

. Smith, & GE Appliances - ResearchAndMarkets.com
The global water softeners market would realize an absolute growth of 63% in terms of revenue in the period between 2021-2027
The rising demand for water treatment in countries such as China, India, and Singapore is expected to propel the demand for water softeners during the forecast period. As we advance, factors like urbanization, pollution, industrialization, population growth, and demography are expected to shape the demand for water softeners in households. WATER SOFTENER MARKET SEGMENTATION
Salt-based segment accounted for majority share of the global water softeners market in 2021 and is expected to grow with an 8.30% CAGR during the forecast period in terms of revenue. By application, residential segment dominated the global water softeners market with a revenue share of 40.12% in 2021 and is expected to grow with a CAGR of 9.12% by the end of 2027. GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLOOK
The North America dominates the overall water softeners market with a share of 38.24% in 2021 in terms of revenue. The growth of this market in North America is mainly supported by the robust demand generated by food & beverages, offices, residential flats, pharmaceutical, universities, and water treatment facilities. VENDOR LANDSCAPE
The key vendors in the water softener market are Culligan, Pentair, 3M, A.O. Smith, and GE Appliances. There has been an increase in the number of mergers and acquisitions in the market. For instance, In 2021, A.O. Smith acquired Master Water Conditioning Corporation, and in 2019, Culligan acquired AquaVenture Holdings. Growth Factors
Effects of Hardwater on Plumbing and Appliances
Increasing Disposable Income
Key Vendors
4.4 Market Segmentation
7 Introduction
8.3 Focus on Preventive Maintenance
8.4 Smart Water Softeners
9.2 Increasing Disposable Income
10 Market Restraints
10.2 Environmental Impact of Water Softener
11 Market Landscape
12.2 Market Overview
13.2 Market Overview
13.4 32,000-64,000 Grain
14 Application
14.2 Market Overview
15.2 Market Overview
16.2 Geographic Overview
Contacts
For U.S./CAN Toll Free Call 1-800-526-8630
For GMT Office Hours Call +353-1-416-8900
Editor Details
PharmiWeb.com is Europe's leading industry-sponsored portal for the Pharmaceutical sector, providing the latest jobs, news, features and events listings. The information provided on PharmiWeb.com is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between a patient/site visitor and his/her physician. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. follow us
Version: 2022.3.2.1
You are leaving PharmiWeb.com
Disclaimer: You are now leaving PharmiWeb.com website and are going to a website that is not operated by us. We are not responsible for the content or availability of linked sites. ABOUT THIRD PARTY LINKS ON OUR SITE
PharmiWeb.com offers links to other third party websites that may be of interest to our website visitors. The links provided in our website are provided solely for your convenience and may assist you in locating other useful information on the Internet. When you click on these links you will leave the PharmiWeb.com website and will be redirected to another site. These sites are not under the control of PharmiWeb.com. PharmiWeb.com is not responsible for the content of linked third party websites. We are not an agent for these third parties nor do we endorse or guarantee their products. We make no representation or warranty regarding the accuracy of the information contained in the linked sites. We suggest that you always verify the information obtained from linked websites before acting upon this information. Also, please be aware that the security and privacy policies on these sites may be different than PharmiWeb.com policies, so please read third party privacy and security policies closely. If you have any questions or concerns about the products and services offered on linked third party websites, please contact the third party directly. Continue

Global Water Softener Market Outlook & Forecast Report 2022-2027 Featuring Prominent Vendors - Culligan, Pentair, 3M, A.O. Smith, & GE Appliances - ResearchAndMarkets.com

To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
<iframe frameborder="1" height="620" scrolling="auto" src="//www.jdsupra.com/post/contentViewerEmbed.aspx?fid=51bb07a6-f959-4154-9cb2-5d4c8013e240" style="border: 2px solid #ccc; overflow-x:hidden !important; overflow:hidden;" width="100%"></iframe>
Despite the absence of any explicit directive in the Bankruptcy Code, it is well understood that a debtor must file a chapter 11 petition in good faith. The bankruptcy court can dismiss a bad faith filing "for cause," which has commonly been found to exist in cases where the debtor seeks chapter 11 protection as a tactic to gain an advantage in pending litigation. A ruling recently handed down by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York suggests that no such good faith filing requirement applies to a petition seeking recognition under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code of a foreign bankruptcy. S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2021), the court granted recognition under chapter 15 to the liquidation proceeding of a Bermuda company despite allegations that the company's court-appointed liquidators filed the chapter 15 petition solely to enjoin shareholder litigation pending in a New York State court. According to the bankruptcy court, although the Bankruptcy Code gives a U.S. court the discretion to deny any chapter 15 relief that is "manifestly contrary" to U.S. public policy, "this exception is not met by a simple finding that the Chapter 15 Petition has been filed as a litigation tactic." Procedures, Recognition, and Relief Under Chapter 15
Chapter 15 was enacted in 2005 to govern cross-border bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings. It is patterned on the 1997 UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency ("Model Law"), which has been enacted in some form by more than 50 countries. Both chapter 15 and the Model Law are premised upon the principle of international comity, or "the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard both to international duty and convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens or of other persons who are under the protection of its laws." Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113, 164 (1895). Chapter 15's stated purpose is "to provide effective mechanisms for dealing with cases of cross-border insolvency" with the objective of, among other things, cooperation between U.S. and non-U.S. courts. Under section 1515 of the Bankruptcy Code, the representative of a foreign debtor may file a petition in a U.S. bankruptcy court seeking "recognition" of a "foreign proceeding." Section 101(24) of the Bankruptcy Code defines "foreign representative" as "a person or body, including a person or body appointed on an interim basis, authorized in a foreign proceeding to administer the reorganization or the liquidation of the debtor's assets or affairs or to act as a representative of such foreign proceeding." Section 109(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that, "[n]otwithstanding any other provision of this section, only a person that resides or has a domicile, a place of business, or property in the United States, or a municipality, may be a debtor under [the Bankruptcy Code]." In Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP v. Barnet (In re Barnet), 737 F.3d 238 (2d Cir. 2013), the Second Circuit ruled that section 109(a) applies in cases under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code. For purposes of section 109(a), "property in the United States" has been held to include an attorney retainer in a U.S. bank account, causes of action under U.S. law against parties in the United States, and contract rights governed by U.S. law, including U.S. dollar-denominated debt issued under an indenture governed by New York law with a New York choice-of-forum clause. See In re Cell C Proprietary Ltd., 571 B.R. 542 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2017); In re Berau Capital Resources Pte Ltd, 540 B.R. 80 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2015); In re Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd., 511 B.R. 361 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2014). "Foreign proceeding" is defined in section 101(23) of the Bankruptcy Code as:
[A] collective judicial or administrative proceeding in a foreign country, including an interim proceeding, under a law relating to insolvency or adjustment of debt in which proceeding the assets and affairs of the debtor are subject to control or supervision by a foreign court, for the purpose of reorganization or liquidation. More than one bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding may be pending with respect to the same foreign debtor in different countries. Chapter 15 therefore contemplates recognition in the United States of both a foreign "main" proceeding—a case pending in the country where the debtor's center of main interests ("COMI") is located (see 11 U.S.C. § 1502(4))—and foreign "nonmain" proceedings, which may be pending in countries where the debtor merely has an "establishment" (see 11 U.S.C. § 1502(5)). A debtor's COMI is presumed to be the location of the debtor's registered office, or habitual residence in the case of an individual. See 11 U.S.C. § 1516(c). An "establishment" is defined by section 1502(2) as "any place of operations where the debtor carries out a nontransitory economic activity." Upon recognition of a foreign "main" proceeding, section 1520(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that certain provisions of the Bankruptcy Code automatically come into force, including: (i) the automatic stay preventing creditor collection efforts with respect to the debtor or its U.S. assets (section 362, subject to certain enumerated exceptions); (ii) the right of any entity asserting an interest in the debtor's U.S. assets to "adequate protection" of that interest (section 361); and (iii) restrictions on use, sale, lease, transfer, or encumbrance of the debtor's U.S. assets (sections 363, 549, and 552). Following recognition of a foreign main or nonmain proceeding, section 1521(a) provides that, to the extent not already in effect, and "where necessary to effectuate the purpose of [chapter 15] and to protect the assets of the debtor or the interests of the creditors," the bankruptcy court may grant "any appropriate relief," including a stay of any action against the debtor or its U.S. assets not covered by the automatic stay, an order suspending the debtor's right to transfer or encumber its U.S. assets, and "any additional relief that may be available to a trustee," with certain exceptions. Under section 1521(b), the court may entrust the distribution of the debtor's U.S. assets to the foreign representative or another person, provided the court is satisfied that the interests of U.S. creditors are "sufficiently protected." Section 1507(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that, upon recognition of a main or nonmain proceeding, the bankruptcy court may provide "additional assistance" to a foreign representative "under [the Bankruptcy Code] or under other laws of the United States." However, the court must consider whether any such assistance, "consistent with principles of comity," will reasonably ensure that: (i) all stakeholders are treated fairly; (ii) U.S. creditors are not prejudiced or inconvenienced by asserting their claims in the foreign proceeding; (iii) the debtor's assets are not preferentially or fraudulently transferred; (iv) proceeds of the debtor's assets are distributed substantially in accordance with the order prescribed by the Bankruptcy Code; and (v) if appropriate, an individual foreign debtor is given the opportunity for a fresh start. See 11 U.S.C. § 1507(b). Section 1522(a) provides that the bankruptcy court may exercise its discretion to order the relief authorized by sections 1519 and 1521 upon the commencement of a case or recognition of a foreign proceeding "only if the interests of the creditors and other interested entities, including the debtor, are sufficiently protected." Finally, section 1506 sets forth a public policy exception to the relief otherwise authorized in chapter 15, providing that "[n]othing in this chapter prevents the court from refusing to take an action governed by this chapter if the action would be manifestly contrary to the public policy of the United States." However, section 1506 requires a "narrow reading" and "does not create an exception for any action under Chapter 15 that may conflict with public policy, but only an action that is 'manifestly contrary.'" In re Fairfield Sentry Ltd., 714 F.3d 127, 139 (2d Cir. 2013). Culligan
Culligan Ltd. ("debtor") was a Bermuda-incorporated holding company for direct and indirect subsidiaries that distributed water purification and filtration units through franchise dealers located exclusively in North America. In a 2006 restructuring, the debtor borrowed $850 million to refinance existing debt, repay $200 million to an investor, and pay a $375 million dividend to shareholders. The debtor restructured again in early 2012. In May 2012, certain of the debtor's minority shareholders, consisting of 71 of the 262 Culligan water dealers (collectively, "plaintiffs"), commenced a derivative action ("NY litigation") against the debtor's directors, its controlling shareholders, and certain other defendants in New York State court. The action alleged that the consolidated Culligan System entities, including the debtor, violated New York law in assuming debt and paying shareholders and investors as part of the 2006 restructuring because they had insufficient capital. The state court dismissed the complaint in in March 2013, ruling that Bermuda law, rather than New York law, applied. The plaintiffs appealed. On April 29, 2013, the debtor's majority shareholders authorized it to commence a members' voluntary liquidation ("MVL") under the Bermuda Companies Act of 1981. That same day, the Bermuda court appointed joint liquidators for the debtor for the purpose of winding up the company. The liquidators notified the plaintiffs of the filing and expressed their view that the NY litigation should not proceed because they had assumed control of the debtor. The plaintiffs refused and in 2014 obtained a reversal on appeal of the state court's dismissal ruling. However, during the ensuing six years, the state court dismissed no fewer than four amended complaints on various grounds. Its decision on a motion to dismiss a fifth amended complaint was pending as of July 2021. In June 2017, one of the debtor's affiliates paid it $11.67 million in connection with the winding-up proceeding, bringing the debtor's total cash holdings to $11.87 million. The liquidators accordingly determined that a distribution should be made to shareholders under the MVL in the amount of approximately $11.34 million. After reserving $500,000 to pay liquidation fees and expenses, as well as fees related to the NY litigation, they distributed $11.1 million to the debtor's shareholders, nearly $400,000 of which they disbursed to 56 of the 71 plaintiffs. As of June 2019, the debtor had approximately $240,000 remaining in payment obligations to multiple shareholders, including nearly $38,000 to the 15 remaining plaintiffs, and had $288,000 in cash. However, due to expected liabilities arising from anticipated fees in the NY litigation, the liquidators determined that the debtor had become insolvent. In July 2019, they accordingly petitioned the Bermuda court to convert the MVL to a court-supervised liquidation. The court granted that relief and confirmed the liquidators in that role for purposes of the liquidation. In June 2020, the liquidators sought an order from the Bermuda court restraining the plaintiffs from suing the debtor or commencing litigation in its name anywhere in the world. That proceeding was suspended, however, after the liquidators, as the debtor's foreign representatives, filed a chapter 15 petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York on September 17, 2020, seeking recognition of the debtor's Bermuda liquidation as a "foreign main proceeding." They also sought an order confirming that the automatic stay precluded continuation of the NY litigation, due to the risk that the suit "may further deplete the dwindling assets of the Debtor and frustrate the Bermuda Liquidation." The plaintiffs opposed the recognition petition, arguing that: (i) the foreign representatives were forum shopping and commenced the case to enjoin the NY litigation and thereby circumvent the adverse rulings of the state court; and (ii) the foreign representatives filed the chapter 15 petition in bad faith and for the improper purpose of barring the plaintiffs from prosecuting the NY litigation by application of the automatic stay. According to the plaintiffs, the foreign representatives' bad faith was evidenced by the facts that the debtor was merely a nominal defendant in the NY litigation, it would not incur any liability, and its litigation costs were covered by insurance. They also asserted that the foreign representatives were not seeking a stay to provide breathing room to conduct good faith liquidation efforts but, rather, improperly seeking chapter 15 recognition and application of the stay to permanently enjoin—as distinguished from merely to pause—the NY litigation. The Bankruptcy Court's Ruling
Eligibility for Chapter 15 Relief. First, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge James L. Garrity, Jr. found that the debtor was eligible for relief under chapter 15 even though it did not have a domicile or place of business in the United States because the debtor had an interest in funds deposited with its U.S. lawyers as a retainer in a client trust account in New York. Next, Judge Garrity concluded that the liquidators qualified as foreign representatives of the debtor in accordance with section 101(24) of the Bankruptcy Code. He also determined that the debtor and the petition for recognition satisfied all of the remaining eligibility requirements for relief under chapter 15. Judge Garrity then considered whether the debtor's COMI was located in Bermuda—a prerequisite for finding that the Bermuda liquidation could be recognized as a "foreign main proceeding." He concluded that the relevant date for determining the debtor's COMI was the date the liquidators were initially appointed by the Bermuda court—in 2013—and that the debtor's activities prior to that date had no bearing on the determination. Judge Garrity found that, both in 2013 and on the chapter 15 petition date in 2020, the debtor's COMI was in Bermuda, where it was incorporated and headquartered; most of its cash was on deposit; the debtor's shareholders voted to commence the MVL; and the liquidators resided and were overseeing all liquidation activities, which were governed by Bermuda law. According to Judge Garrity, the contingent and disputed litigation claims asserted in the NY litigation did not support a finding that the debtor's COMI was in New York, even though the state court had determined that New York law governed the dispute and much of the documentary evidence was located in New York. Alleged Bad Faith Did Not Preclude Recognition. Judge Garrity also ruled that the narrow and rarely invoked public policy exception in section 1506 did not warrant denial of chapter 15 recognition. He wrote that "courts have generally found that section 1506 does not prohibit recognition in situations where the debtor has engaged in bad faith." Culligan, 2021 WL 2787926 , at *15 (citing In re Manley Toys Ltd., 580 B.R. 632, 648 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2018), aff'd, 597 B.R. 578 (D.N.J. 2019); In re Creative Fin. Ltd., 543 B.R. 498, 515 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2016)). Instead, Judge Garrity explained, the question under section 1506 is not whether the debtor's actions violate public policy, but whether the foreign court's procedures and safeguards fail to comport with U.S. public policy. Judge Garrity acknowledged that there was evidence to show that the foreign representatives filed the chapter 15 petition as part of their "litigation strategy" to bring an end to the NY litigation and that "the admitted, and apparently entire, purpose of the present chapter 15 filing" was to prevent the plaintiffs from continuing the lawsuit. Id. at *15. However, he faulted the plaintiffs' reliance on case law finding bad faith as "cause" for dismissing chapter 11 cases under section 1112(b) of the Bankruptcy Code. Unlike in chapter 11, Judge Garrity reiterated, recognition under chapter 15 is subject to the public policy exception of section 1506, which considers not whether the actions of the debtor violate public policy, but whether the foreign court's procedures and safeguards fail to comport with U.S. public policy. In the absence of any such allegations, Judge Garrity held that the alleged bad faith was not a basis to deny chapter 15 recognition. Judge Garrity accordingly granted the petition for recognition of the Bermuda liquidation proceeding under chapter 15 as a foreign main proceeding. In so ruling, he declined to address whether the foreign representatives were entitled to supplementary injunctive relief under section 1521 (in addition to the automatic stay arising upon recognition under section 1520(a)) and stated that any request by the plaintiffs for relief from the automatic stay to continue the NY litigation was premature because it was not procedurally proper. Outlook
Culligan highlights important distinctions between cases under chapter 11 and chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code. Good faith acts as a gatekeeper to chapter 11 because access to chapter 11 is premised on the legitimacy of the debtor's need to reorganize or effect an orderly liquidation in response to genuine financial distress. Thus, the good faith inquiry focuses on the debtor's motives for seeking chapter 11 protection. And, as articulated in In re National Rifle Association of America, 628 B.R. 262 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2021), a chapter 11 case filed to gain an unfair advantage in litigation or avoid a regulatory scheme generally will be dismissed because the bankruptcy was not commenced in good faith. By contrast, the public policy exception in chapter 15 focuses on the foreign country's insolvency process, rather than the debtor or its conduct. Chapter 15 was designed to provide a mechanism for U.S. bankruptcy courts to assist foreign tribunals and functionaries in the process of overseeing a foreign debtor's bankruptcy or insolvency. Provided the foreign bankruptcy or insolvency process roughly comports with U.S. public policy, the foreign debtor's (or foreign representative's) intent behind seeking recognition through chapter 15 is largely irrelevant.

New York Bankruptcy Court Rules that Good Faith Is Not the Gatekeeper to Chapter 15

ZeroWater The ONLY filtered water that meets FDA definition for purified bottled water.* SHOP ZeroWater PRODUCTS Visit the company's online store for replacement filters, filter bottles, and pitchersor find a Retailer. * Filtered potable tap water tested by an independent lab (not the FDA) to meet specifically the water quality requirements for using the label 'purified.'

Zero Technologies

ZeroWater 's partnership with Culligan shows an evolution of our brand that focuses on our customers first .

Shower Head Filters for Cleaner, Softer Skin, and Hair.

World Concern is a Christian global relief and development agency extending opportunity and hope to people facing extreme poverty.

World Concern

Vertical Solutions develops, implements, and supports Service Management and customer experience solutions, including VService Management for customer support, field service, mobile environments, VContact Center for internal, external, and hybrid contact centers. It is based in Cincinnati, Ohio

Vertical Solutions

FilterBoxx designs and engineers packaged solutions, including drinking water, wastewater and industrial water treatment facilities.

FilterBoxx

Danaher

Alcoa

Funding Date

Pre-Money Valuation

Post-Money Valuation

Amount Raised

Shares Authorized

Issuance Price

Dividend Rate

Liquidation Preferences

Liquidation Price

Participation

Conversion Price

Anti Dilution

General Voting

Board Voting

Par Value

Acq - Fin

Private Equity

Culligan is a global water treatment company that provides water softening and filtration technology.

Wells Fargo Success Story

3M Success Story

Platform Overview

Culligan

Culligan's alternatives and competitors

Culligan vs. Tapp Water

Top Culligan competitor

Work for Culligan?

You May Also Like

Discover the right solution for your team