The highly anticipated Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill (the “Bill”) was introduced to the House of Commons yesterday on 20 May 2020. Its aims appear to be simple: safeguard companies and maximise their chances of survival thereby preserving jobs.

Die enormen wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen der weltweiten COVID-19-Pandemie haben die deutsche Wirtschaft massiv getroffen. Für viele Branchen hat sich das Geschäftsklima erheblich verschlechtert.

The huge economic impact of the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic has long since reached the German economy. For many industries, the business climate has deteriorated massively. Stores remain closed, supply chains are affected, customer numbers have significantly dropped and businesses have to impose reduced work hours (Kurzarbeit) or forced leave to reduce costs.

Die Unsicherheit, die von einer weltweiten Ausbreitung des neuartigen Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2 ausgeht, hat längst die deutsche Wirtschaft erreicht.

Für viele Branchen hat sich das Geschäftsklima massiv eingetrübt. Selbst wenn staatliche Hilfen ausgezahlt werden wird man sich besser früher als später ernsthafte Überlegungen zu einer umfassenden Restrukturierung machen müssen. Ein hilfreicher Weg ist die Sanierung durch Planverfahren, oft verbunden mit Schutzschirm oder sonstiger Eigenverwaltung.

Die wesentlichen Vorzüge auf einen Blick:

Given the current pressure all businesses face dealing with the effect of Covid-19, it is important that directors understand what their duties are in respect of insolvent companies or companies that are at risk of heading towards insolvency.

In this blog we briefly remind directors what their duties are, the potential claims that could be brought against them in the event of insolvency and how they might arise. To mitigate against these risks it is critically important that directors:

In this three part blog we highlight three recent court decisions concerning landlord rights and insolvency, which provide cautionary warnings and surprising twists. The questions we consider are:

1. Does a company voluntary arrangement (“CVA”) permanently vary the terms of a lease?
2. Can a landlord be forced to accept a surrender of a lease?
3. What are the consequences of taking money from a rent deposit if the tenant company is in administration?

In part 1 we consider the first question.

The hair salon Regis announced recently that the company has entered administration. The news might not come as a surprise because the chain, prior to the company’s administration, was subject to a company voluntary arrangement (“CVA”) whose validity was challenged by landlords.

The joint administrator of Regis commented: “trading challenges, coupled with the uncertainty caused by the legal challenge, have necessitated the need for an administration appointment”.

Can a CVA bind a landlord in respect of future rents? Is the landlord a creditor in respect of future rent? What about the right to forfeit; can a CVA modify that right? Is compromising rent under a CVA automatically unfair to landlords when other trade creditors are paid in full?

These were some of the points considered by the Court in determining whether the Debenhams’ CVA (which had been challenged by landlords) should fail.

One point of particular interest is whether reducing rents below market value in a CVA is automatically unfair to landlords?

Am 16. Juli 2019 ist die Richtlinie (EU) 2019/1023 über präventive Restrukturierungsrahmen in Kraft getreten. Ihre Umsetzung in das nationale Recht der Mitgliedstaaten wird von Sanierungsspezialisten vor dem Hintergrund sinkender Wachstumsprognosen und Warnungen vor einem Wirtschaftseinbruch mit Spannung erwartet.

The Preventive Restructuring Frameworks Directive (EU) 2019/1023 is finally in force. Following its implementation into EU member states’ national law, the directive will hopefully prove an effective tool for Europe’s restructuring practitioners, just as the continent’s economic outlook darkens.