Insights
Publications

California’s New Voidable Transactions Act

9/8/2015 Articles

California’s recently enacted  Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (UVTA), makes it easier for creditors to recover assets that are transferred to third parties when a debtor is insolvent, even when there is no improper intent by the debtor or the transferee. 

The UVTA supersedes the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (California Civil Code Sections 3439 et seq.) (UFTA). The UVTA applies to transfers made or obligations incurred after January 1, 2016 (the UFTA will continue to apply to prior transactions). Key changes from the UFTA include:

  • Challenging a transfer will be easier for a creditor: the creditor only needs to establish its claim by a “preponderance” of the evidence, rather than the higher “clear and convincing” evidence standard applied by some courts under the UFTA. Moreover, a party defending a claim now clearly has the burden of: (i) rebutting the presumption that the debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer based on failure to pay debts as they came due and (ii) asserting that property was transferred for a reasonably equivalent value and in good faith. These procedural changes may sound technical, but they tilt the scales in favor of the creditor.
  • A creditor asserting a UVTA claim now has additional remedies, including obtaining pre-judgment “attachment” of a transferee’s assets generally, rather than such attachment being limited to the asset transferred or its proceeds, as is the case under the UFTA. This will put additional pressure on a transferee to settle.

The name change itself (from Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act to Uniform Voidable Transactions Act) emphasizes that the law is focused on avoidance of transfers made or of obligations incurred by an insolvent debtor in exchange for less than reasonably equivalent value, regardless of actual fraud or improper intent. 

A claim under the UVTA is now governed by the law of the state where the debtor is “located” at the time the transfer is made or the obligation is incurred. For an individual, this is the individual's principal residence; for an organization, this is the organization's place of business, or its chief executive office if it has multiple places of business. This change is designed to reduce uncertainty regarding the law applicable to a claim, which can be critical because states have adopted non-uniform versions of the UFTA and UVTA. Defendants have often used uncertainty regarding which version of the UFTA to apply as a tool to hinder creditor claims.

Navigating a claim under UFTA and the new UVTA can be tricky, the more so now as the law evolves to focus on technical rules that might not appear obviously. The advice of legal counsel with appropriate experience will be critical to pursuing or defending such litigation.

Firm Highlights

Publication

7 Ways to Check If Coronavirus Triggers ‘Force Majeure’ Clauses in Your Wine Business Contracts

Never in the experience of most of us has an event so thoroughly interrupted business as usual as the coronavirus pandemic. The wine business runs on contracts: grape purchase agreements, event hosting contracts, vineyard...

Read More
Publication

Hospitality Companies and Their Lenders: Preparing for Difficult Conversations

In a sudden reversal of generally expansionary trends, the hospitality business has been among the most immediate and badly hit economic sectors as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the resulting stay-at-home and...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Attorneys, Practices Recognized by Chambers USA 2020

SAN FRANCISCO, April 23, 2020: Farella Braun + Martel announces that Chambers USA has recognized 12 lawyers and five practice areas in the legal directory’s 2020 edition. Individual Rankings: Tyler Gerking – Insurance: Policyholders...

Read More
Publication

Three Steps Licensees Can Take to Protect Their IP Rights in Bankruptcy

During periods of widespread economic disruption such as the present, operating businesses must be able to identify and respond to threats to the financial health of their contracting counterparts in order to protect key...

Read More
News

Farella Represents Sports Industry Veterans in Forming SPAC RedBall Acquisition Corp.

SAN FRANCISCO, July 28, 2020: Farella Braun + Martel represented sports industry veterans Billy Beane, the EVP of Baseball Operations for the Oakland A's, and Luke Bornn, Vice President, Strategy and Analytics at the Sacramento...

Read More
News

52 Farella Braun + Martel Attorneys Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2021

Read More
News

Dan Cohn Named to American Friends of Tel Aviv University Board of Directors

SAN FRANCISCO, May 26, 2020: Farella Braun + Martel Partner Daniel E. Cohn was elected to the American Friends of Tel Aviv University (AFTAU) Board of Directors. AFTAU is a nonprofit organization that raises...

Read More
Publication

CARES Act Paycheck Protection Program Summary (Updated)

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) aims to provide qualifying small businesses, nonprofit organizations, veterans organizations, tribal businesses, sole proprietors, and independent contractors forgivable loans of...

Read More
Publication

Engineering, Procurement and Construction Agreements for Utility-Scale Battery Projects

The negotiation of an engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) agreement for a battery energy storage systems (BESS) project typically surfaces many of the same contractual risk allocation issues that one encounters in the negotiation...

Read More
Publication

Renewable Energy Roundtable Update in the Wake of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread disruption of business and industry across California, including the state’s vibrant renewable energy and energy storage industry. Farella Braun + Martel attorneys are tracking developments and advising...

Read More