Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 JULY 2014

Tortious Interference Claims: Something To Keep In Mind

A hedge fund sued an investment bank for tortious interference based on its exclusion from participation in exit financing for a debtor.

United StatesInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring

Highland Capital Mgmt. L.P. v. UBS Securities, LLC (In re Lyondell Chemical Co.), 505 B.R. 409 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) –

A hedge fund sued an investment bank for tortious interference based on its exclusion from participation in exit financing for a debtor. The bankruptcy court granted the investment banker's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, and the hedge fund appealed.

The debtor (Lyondell) was described as the world's third largest chemical company with yearly revenues approaching $31 billion. To complete its reorganization, the debtor sought syndication of a $1 billion senior term loan facility as part of its exit financing.

The engagement letter between Lyondell and an investment bank (UBS) as one of the Joint Lead Arrangers and Joint Bookrunners provided that "the Joint Lead Arrangers, in consultation and cooperation with [Lyondell], will manage all aspects of any syndication, including decisions as to... which institutions will participate."

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