Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 OCTOBER 2016

Curing Ambiguities And Defects Without Noteholder Vote: Not So Fast

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
Contributor
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

We have one of the largest Southeast Asia international law practices, working across the region...

View firm profile
Explore more from Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

A recent decision in New York State Appellate Court demonstrates what can go wrong when an issuer attempts to correct what it asserts to be an ambiguity or defect in an indenture without a noteholder vote.

United StatesFinance and Banking

A recent decision in New York State Appellate Court, GSO Coastline Credit Partners L.P. v. Global A&T Electronics Ltd. (NY App. Div. 1st Dept. May 3, 2016), demonstrates what can go wrong when an issuer attempts to correct what it asserts to be an ambiguity or defect in an indenture without a noteholder vote.

In GSO Coastline , Global A&T Electronics Ltd. (GATE) had two first lien credit facilities and two second lien credit facilities, aggregating approximately $775 million and $475 million, respectively. In February 2013, GATE issued approximately $625 million of notes (the Original Notes) pursuant to an indenture (the Indenture) and used the proceeds to prepay the first lien facilities. The Original Notes were secured by a first lien on GATE's assets.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from