Appellate Decisions

The Finality of Bankruptcy Court Orders Recognizing Foreign Proceedings

The Eleventh Circuit held that a bankruptcy court order order recognizing a foreign proceeding is final.

April 11, 2024

By Bryan Lammon

In In re Al Zawawi, the Eleventh Circuit held that a bankruptcy court order recognizing a foreign proceeding is final and thus appealable.

The Proceedings in Al Zawawi

Al Zawawi involved a debtor who had been adjudged bankrupt by a court in the United Kingdom. His creditors then sought recognition of this foreign judgment in a U.S. bankruptcy court. Recognition of the judgment would subject the debtor’s assets in the United States to an automatic stay and permit discovery and other relief concerning those assets.

The bankruptcy court granted the request and recognized the judgment. The debtor then appealed. But bankruptcy proceedings were not yet over. Indeed, they had only just begun. The Eleventh Circuit thus had to determine its jurisdiction.

Finality in Bankruptcy

Finality in the bankruptcy context can get complicated. A single bankruptcy action can involve a variety of proceedings that, outside of the bankruptcy context, would have been separate actions. And some decisions bankruptcy courts make in the course of their proceedings can have an immense influence on all future proceedings.

In 2020’s Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC, the Supreme Court laid out guidelines for determining finality in the bankruptcy context. The Court explained that a bankruptcy court order is final if “(1) it involves ‘a discrete procedural sequence, including notice and a hearing,’’ as set forth by statute, and (2) it ‘occurs before and apart from the proceedings on the merits of creditors’ claims.’” (For more on Ritzen Group, see my post Ritzen Group Holds that Denials of Relief from Bankruptcy’s Automatic Stay are Appealable.)

The Finality of Recognizing a Foreign Judgment

The resolution of a petition to recognize a foreign proceeding satisfied both Ritzen Group requirements:

Petitions for recognition trigger a discrete procedural sequence that includes notice and a hearing. And although the adjudication of a petition for recognition does not occur before the proceedings on the merits, i.e., the foreign proceeding, it occurs apart from those proceedings in the sense that it introduces for the first time and fully occurs in a new legal system, i.e., the federal courts of the United States.

(Cleaned up.)

The Eleventh Circuit added that delayed appeals from recognition orders could risk unraveling later bankruptcy proceedings that relied on the recognition. And the dispute was not minor—it would “determine[] whether the parties to a foreign proceeding will have access to the judicial resources and power of the United States,” which “can have significant implications for enormous amounts of property held in the United States and abroad.”

In re Al Zawawi, 2024 WL 1423871 (11th Cir. Apr. 3, 2024), available at the Eleventh Circuit and Westlaw

recent posts

No Perlman Appeals When the Same Issues Could Be Raised via Contempt
The Eleventh Circuit held that a privilege claimant cannot take a Perlman appeal when the claimant could have raised the same issues via its own contempt appeal.
A Rule 4 Conflict: The Prison-Mailbox Rule v. the Mistaken-Filing Rule
The Fifth Circuit held that when an imprisoned appellant mistakenly mails a notice of appeal to the court of appeals, the notice is deemed filed when deposited in the prison mail system.
The Month in Federal Appellate Jurisdiction: September 2024
Another split on pure Bivens appeals, no equitable exceptions for Rule 4(a)(4), another failure to apply the Rule 3(c) amendments, and more.
Serving, Filing, and Equitable Exceptions to Rule 4(a)(4)
The Second Circuit reiterated its rule that a post-judgment motion must be timely filed—not merely served—to reset the appeal clock. The court added that Rule 4(a)(4) does not allow for equitable exceptions and addressed an order-designation issue, too.
Yet Another Split Rejection of Pure Bivens Appeals
The Ninth Circuit joined the Third and Tenth Circuits in rejecting pure Bivens appeals. But like those courts, the Ninth’s decision was split.

related posts

Non-Core Proceedings and Certified Bankruptcy Appeals
When the resolution of a core proceeding in bankruptcy depends on the resolution of a non-core proceeding, the latter can be certified for a direct appeal.
Bankruptcy Appeals & Multi-Level Finality
A Sixth Circuit concurrence would not require finality at the first level of bankruptcy review for the court of appeals to have jurisdiction.
New Split on Bankruptcy’s Appeal Deadline
The Sixth Circuit became the first court of appeals to hold that bankruptcy’s part-statute, part-rule appeal deadline is not jurisdictional.
A Ninth Circuit Primer on Appealing Bankruptcy Remands
The Ninth Circuit explained that a bankruptcy remand is not appealable when the proceedings on remand could produce their own appeal.
Ritzen Group Holds that Denials of Relief from Bankruptcy’s Automatic Stay are Appealable
In Ritzen Group, the Supreme Court held that an order denying relief from bankruptcy’s automatic stay is final and appealable.