Private Credit

Subscribe to Private Credit via RSS

Private credit lenders began 2020 facing the dual challenges of an increased risk of defaults and a lack of strong financial covenants, and the pandemic sparked a significant increase in defaults to 8.1% in Q2. However, borrower defaults in Q3 and Q4 were lower than anticipated following the COVID-fueled spike…

A significant ownership stake in a portfolio company has always raised the specter of claims against funds, sponsors, and sponsor-appointed board designees, if for no other reason than they are perceived by the plaintiffs’ bar to be deep pockets.  This risk has only increased in recent years, as it has…

The past year saw a burst in popularity of SPACs. More than half of companies that went public in 2020 did so using a SPAC on their way to raising over $80 billion in proceeds, and so far in 2021 SPAC offerings far outpace traditional IPOs. SPACs allow companies to go public with greater speed and with fewer hurdles than a traditional IPO. These innovations combined with unprecedented deal volume may signal an increased risk for disputes, especially where the SPAC process and structure can present unique pitfalls.

For example, SPACs must issue registration statements and proxies in advance of acquiring a target company, which require compliance with Sections 11 and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act.  But unlike in traditional IPOs, SPAC target companies may disclose projections of future performance before shareholders vote on whether to move forward with a merger, and failure to meet those projections could lead to litigation by shareholders or the SEC. The SEC has issued guidance on the types of disclosures that SPACs specifically should keep in mind, including disclosures pertaining to sponsors’, officers’ and directors’ financial incentives, prior SPAC experience, and conflicts of interest with other entities to which they owe fiduciary duties.  SPACs also often raise money through PIPE (private offering in public equity) transactions, which allow for private investment on special terms, but those require separate disclosures and result in an additional set of shareholders who could later bring claims. By their nature, SPACs also present a number of other regulatory risks, including risks relating to MNPI, valuation, and conflicts of interest.

The regulatory and litigation risks for private funds are greater than at any time since the financial crisis in 2008. Just a few examples prove the point: the pandemic (which caused extraordinary volatility in revenues and valuations for most asset categories); a new administration in Washington D.C. (with a more…

This past year, we highlighted a Delaware Chancery case adopting an expansive view in favor of parties seeking information from companies under Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law.  The Delaware Supreme Court recently affirmed the Chancery Court’s ruling, providing additional appellate guidance on Section 220 and endorsing limits…

Last year, we highlighted the risks of filing a Section 220 books and records request post-litigation, citing a case where the Delaware Chancery Court found that such use was an improper attempt to “sue first, ask questions later.”

Recently, the Delaware Chancery Court opined on this issue again in Lebanon County Employees’ Retirement Fund v. AmerisourceBergen Corporation – this time, the Vice Chancellor took a more expansive view in favor of the parties seeking information under Section 220. Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law allows stockholders to inspect books and records of a Delaware corporation for any proper purpose and to compel inspection if such inspection is refused.

The private fund industry is more in the public eye than ever before.  Private capital and private markets have experienced massive growth over the last two decades, substantially outpacing the growth of public equity. We have witnessed that trend continue during the past year, and have worked with…

An increasingly sophisticated and active OCIE division, innovative market disruptors, a maturing credit cycle, and a philosophical change in how the private fund industry views and utilizes litigation are likely to lead to increased regulatory scrutiny and litigation risk for advisers (and their funds) in 2019.  With that backdrop, we are pleased to present our Top Ten Regulatory and Litigation Risks for Private Funds in 2019.

We are pleased to announce that partner Samuel Waldon has joined Proskauer’s Litigation Department in DC, enhancing the Firm’s securities litigation and regulatory enforcement practices.  Among his other areas of focus, Sam will bolster the firm’s Asset Management Litigation team.

“In today’s ever evolving regulatory landscape, Sam’s extensive experience at…

With the public equity markets at an all-time high and private equity fund raising setting new records, it might seem counterintuitive to forecast litigation and regulatory risks.  The opposite is true.  Disputes typically follow capital, and the steeper the growth curve, the greater the risk of litigation and regulatory scrutiny.  With that backdrop, we are pleased to present our Top Ten Regulatory and Litigation Risks for Private Funds in 2018.

1. Regulatory Scrutiny Involving Cryptocurrencies and ICOs

Cryptocurrencies and other instruments based on blockchain technology – such as Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) – are in the regulators’ sights.  The SEC has asserted jurisdiction over products structured as ICOs and is pursuing violations of the anti-fraud provisions and registration violations involving ICOs and cryptocurrencies.  A number of enforcement attorneys in the SEC’s new Cyber Unit are focused on ICO and cryptocurrency investigations, with more cases in the pipeline.  In addition, the CFTC has declared virtual currencies to be “commodities” subject to its oversight under the Commodity Exchange Act and has brought a number of actions under the anti-fraud provisions of the CEA against industry participants.  Fund managers with investments in or exposure to these areas should prepare for questions about disclosures and increasing regulatory scrutiny and spillover relating to those investments.