Fulltext Search

The High Court has clarified the grounds for challenging a CVA for guarantee creditors.

Background

Mizen Design/Build Ltd's (Mizen) directors proposed a CVA stating that this would lead to a better result for unsecured creditors than the likely alternative, administration.

The CVA compromised guarantee creditors' ability both to bring a claim against Mizen and to call upon their performance guarantees against Mizen's parent company (the Parent Guarantor).

This recent decision has opened up a new opportunity for creditors who are not satisfied with a proposal to put forward their own restructuring plan.

Background

Good Box Co Labs Limited (the Company), a fintech start-up, developed contactless payment technologies in the charity sector.

It entered administration in June 2022 on the application of NGI Systems Limited (NGI) a principal technology supplier, creditor and shareholder of the Company.

CargoLogicAir Limited (the Company) was the UK's only all-cargo main deck freight airline. Due to sanctions imposed on its Russian owner, the Company was unable to effectively trade and pay its debts as they fell due despite obtaining a 'Basic Needs Licence'. Its sole director applied to appoint administrators.

Issues

The court considered two key issues:

On 7 December 2022, the European Commission published its proposal for a directive harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law (the Insolvency Directive).

The Insolvency Directive seeks to offer more certainty and create a common minimum standard of insolvency regimes across member states, encouraging more effective cross-border investment.

It aims to harmonise three key areas of EU insolvency law (the Insolvency Directive).

Aims law:

  • the recovery of assets

  • the efficiency of proceedings

On 7 December 2022, the European Commission published its proposal for a directive harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law (the Insolvency Directive).

Aims

The Insolvency Directive seeks to offer more certainty and create a common minimum standard of insolvency regimes across Member States, encouraging more effective cross-border investment.

It aims to harmonise three key areas of EU insolvency law:

  • the recovery of assets

  • the efficiency of proceedings, and

Re Bitumina Industries Ltd (in administration); Manning and another v Neste AB and another [2022].

This was an application by joint administrators for directions on the validity of a floating charge granted to a connected party at a 'relevant time' and seemingly invalid under s245 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the Act).

Background

Background
Decision
Key takeaways


The recent High Court decision in Re Nostrum Oil & Gas plc [2022] EWHC 2249 (Ch) considers a scheme of arrangement where creditors are the target of Russian sanctions.

中伦观点

在系列上篇中,我们梳理了地产项目债务重组相关政策,结合经验总结债务重组的原则、项目与项目公司尽职调查实务重点。在下篇中,我们着重梳理困境项目重组方案经验,并分享对行政赋能的一些思考,供读者参考。

房地产行业高速发展10余年,在“房住不炒”的宏观背景以及2020年8月“三道红线”政策后,因房地产行业的发展模式及市场发展规律、政策执行力度、国家宏观调控等多方面的原因,房地产市场从2021年9月开始经历行业“缩表”的阵痛,不少大型房地产企业先后出现债务风险,面临诸多的困难处境,继而影响资金方、施工方、材料设备供应方及购房业主等多方主体。房地产市场影响国民经济及民生多个方面,在行业困境下,政府亦在监管、维稳、施救等多方面遇到难题。表面上看,各方主体皆可按政策与法律处理,但实操中,商业诉求与法律的平衡,经济效果与社会效果、法律效果的协调,社会资源的调度与节约,仍需探索最佳路径。

本文仅就困境项目的成因、市场常见盘活方案等问题,从法律角度予以整理,请勿以此作为法律意见在实践中套用。

一、困境项目重组方案

房地产行业高速发展10余年,在“房住不炒”的宏观背景以及2020年8月“三道红线”政策后,因房地产行业的发展模式及市场发展规律、政策执行力度、国家宏观调控等多方面的原因,房地产市场从2021年9月开始经历行业“缩表”的阵痛,不少大型房地产企业先后出现债务风险,面临诸多的困难处境,继而影响资金方、施工方、材料设备供应方及购房业主等多方主体。房地产市场影响国民经济及民生多个方面,在行业困境下,政府亦在监管、维稳、施救等多方面遇到难题。表面上看,各方主体皆可按政策与法律处理,但实操中,商业诉求与法律的平衡,经济效果与社会效果、法律效果的协调,社会资源的调度与节约,仍需探索最佳路径。

单纯的法律手段难以解决问题的情形下,笔者认为:房地产困境的解决,最终需要落实到具体的房地产项目庭外重组与盘活。开展全行业性的政策拯救或对大型地产公司进行全面的庭外重组盘活,需假以时日并多方共同努力。因此,结合近一年多的地产项目重组盘活经验,笔者希望从政府管理、商业诉求、法律实践等方面,为各方在房地产项目困境中破局提供些建议,达到解决具体房地产项目的实际问题,使项目价值最大化,最大程度实现各方利益诉求,从一定程度上缓解目前房地产困境。

本文仅就困境项目的成因、市场常见盘活方案等问题,从法律角度予以整理,请勿以此作为法律意见在实践中套用。

The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed the appeal of the decision in BTI –v- Sequana.

At a time when many companies are facing financial difficulties and directors are considering their legal duties, this long-awaited judgment has confirmed that directors have a 'creditor interest duty' when a company is insolvent or bordering on insolvency or an insolvent liquidation or administration is probable.  

Background