The Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) is currently finalizing the law to mitigate the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in civil, insolvency, and criminal proceedings with extraordinary commitment. It shall be adopted less than two weeks after the beginning of the extensive restrictions on public life and the economy in Germany due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

A central element of the law is to facilitate the raising of debt capital in order to support companies in the current situation. For this purpose:

Mit außerordentlichem Engagement treibt das Bundesministerium für Justiz und Verbraucherschutz (BMJV) aktuell das Gesetz zur Abmilderung der Folgen der COVID-19-Pandemie im Zivil-, Insolvenz- und Strafverfahrensrecht voran. Weniger als zwei Wochen nach Beginn der weitreichenden Einschränkungen des öffentlichen Lebens und auch der Wirtschaft in Deutschland aufgrund der COVID-19-Pandemie soll es nun verabschiedet werden.

The Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) now implements, with great commitment and unprecedented speed, what it has generally announced on 16 March 2020 (see also The four pillar protective governmental shield for Germany):

The Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) now implements, with great commitment and unprecedented speed, what it has generally announced on 16 March 2020: 

Das Bundesministerium für Justiz und Verbraucherschutz (BMJV) lässt nun mit enormem Einsatz und mit wohl einmaliger Geschwindigkeit seiner vom 16. März 2020 Akündigung Taten folgen (siehe auch: Vier Säulen Schutzschild für Deutschland):

Noch in dieser Woche sollen

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:

The German government announced that it will expand the KfW financing programme.

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?