After nearly two years of discussion and consultation, the Department for Business Skills and Innovation (BIS) announced on 26 January 2012 that it will not be seeking to introduce new legislative controls on pre-packs. These were to include a much heralded three-day notice period for creditors to challenge the sale. Many have been left surprised by the government’s apparent u-turn and dismayed that so much time and effort seems to have come to nothing.
A High Court ruling in England today has provided a significant clarification of the law relating to payment of rent as an administration expense.
In Leisure (Norwich) II Limited v Luminar Lava Ignite Limited (in administration), the Court confirmed that rent payable in advance prior to the appointment of administrators is not payable as an expense of the administration, even if the administrators continue to use the property. This means that the rent would not be given priority over other unsecured debts.
After nearly two years of discussion and consultation, the UK Government has today announced that it will not be seeking to introduce new legislative controls on pre-packs, including a proposed three day notice or "cooling off" period.
The term “pre-pack” typically refers to a sale of all or part of a company’s business which is negotiated prior to the company going into administration and then completed by the administrator shortly after his appointment.
Last week the High Court of England and Wales revoked a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) promoted by retailer Miss Sixty in a damning judgment that called into question the conduct of the practitioners involved. The case of Mourant & Co Trustees Limited v Sixty UK Limited (in administration) [2010] could end so-called guarantee stripping – where the CVA purports to discharge guarantees given by a third party – and provide powerful ammunition to landlords seeking to negotiate future CVAs with tenant companies.
His Honour Judge Purle QC in Re Cornercare Limited [2010] EWHC 393 (CH) has clarified English law on the filing of successive notices of intention to appoint administrators. He has held that there is nothing in the relevant provisions of the Insolvency Act 1986 ("IA 1986") to prevent the filing of successive notices of intention to appoint administrators, where the original notice of intention to appoint an administrator had not been acted upon for good reason.
The High Court of England and Wales handed down judgment last week in the case of Christine Mary Laverty and others as Joint Liquidators of PGL Realisations PLC and others v British Gas Trading Limited [2014] EWHC 2721. In an important decision for the insolvency industry, it was held that the statutory deemed contracts regime for gas and electricity supply could not be used by utilities companies to gain priority over other creditors.
The UK Court of Appeal has swept aside existing rules governing when administrators have to pay advance rents falling due before their appointment.
In what will be seen as a significant victory for landlords, the Court held on 24 February 2014 that it was not open for administrators to enjoy a rent free period simply because they were appointed just after a quarter day. The decision will have major implications for the planning and implementation of corporate insolvencies and looks set to transform the relationship between insolvency practitioners and the property industry.
Landlords often ask for a rent deposit when they grant a new lease, or consent to an assignment, especially if the incoming tenant is of shaky covenant strength. This provides security against possible future default.
If a tenant becomes insolvent then this is exactly the sort of situation where a landlord would want to make use of a deposit. Where it is in the “commingling” form (i.e. paid to the landlord so that it becomes a debt in favour of the tenant) then that is unproblematic: no restrictions are imposed by the moratorium which arises on the tenant’s insolvency.
The UK High Court today took a crucial step towards resolving the difficult issue of when administrators must pay rent.
Collapsed retailer British Home Stores cannot challenge its own company voluntary arrangement as an unenforceable contractual penalty and must repay rental discounts to its landlords, the High Court in England and Wales decided yesterday.
The case, in which Hogan Lovells represented the successful landlord, provides important guidance on the operation of company voluntary arrangements (CVAs), particularly after termination, and the payment of rent as an expense of a company’s administration in priority to other debts.
CVAs