The plan, approved by a judge, was discriminatory according to dissenting creditors with debt maturing later that include
“Our notes are at greatly material risk of not being paid,” Tom Smith, a lawyer for the bondholders, said at the Court of Appeal on Monday.
Bondholders stuck with debt maturing in 2029 appealed an April ruling that ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.