![]() ![]() While courts applying the prior law had found that transfers to insiders to satisfy antecedent debts could be considered fraudulent conveyances, the UVTA for the first time has codified such claims. Reorganization of voidable transactions: The UVTA restructures available claims into two categories of voidable transactions: 1) those voidable as to present and future creditors (Section 273), which includes both transfers made with fraudulent intent or that lack fair consideration (called “reasonably equivalent value” in the UVTA) and 2) those voidable only as to present creditors (Section 274), which includes transfers made without fair consideration (using a different test than in Section 273) and transfers made to insiders under certain circumstances.īy enacting the UVTA, New York has now harmonized its fraudulent conveyance law with that of the overwhelming number of jurisdictions in the United States, as well as with the federal Bankruptcy Code.Īmong the substantive changes that the UVTA makes to the treatment of fraudulent conveyances-now referred to as “voidable transactions”-under New York law are as follows: The UVTA was originally drafted by the Uniform Law Commission as an amendment to the 1984 Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”) New York was one of only seven states that did not adopt the original UFTA. Since its introduction by the Uniform Law Commission in 2014, the UVTA has now been adopted by 21 states. Last month, New York enacted the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (“UVTA”), which seeks to modernize the state’s fraudulent conveyance law. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |