For RSLs who are routinely contracting with housebuilders for golden brick delivery of affordable housing across multiple phases, we discuss the four key actions that can help if the housebuilder becomes insolvent.

1. Pre-Insolvency – Financial Distress Provisions and Due Diligence

The first quarter of the year can often be a pinch point for tenants as they assess Christmas trading and scrutinise financial results. Where profits have failed to meet expectations then a tenant may require to consider formal insolvency proceedings but how does this affect the landlord? Here we consider some of the key questions for a landlord in Scotland facing tenant insolvency.

What is the status of the tenant?

2023 was a year where we saw buyers and sellers of commercial real estate assets not necessarily always aligned on pricing against a backdrop of lending headwinds. As the year drew to a close, visible signs of distress were reported to be emerging in certain corners of the real estate sector which may well bring fruitful opportunities in 2024 for property investors looking to acquire new assets via distressed or enforced sales. But what is a "distressed" property sale and what are the key considerations for buyers looking to acquire these types of assets?

CVAs continued to be a popular restructuring tool in 2021. As the retail industry gears up for what is expected to be a busy festive period, it marks the end of another year in which the close scrutiny and attempted challenge by landlords to retail CVAs continued.

What is a CVA?

CVAs remain the restructuring tool of choice for businesses with multi-let properties. Since the start of the first UK lockdown, there has been a marked increase in the number of CVAs in the hospitality and retail sectors. Whilst vaccines are now being dispensed, the economic ramifications of the pandemic will persist for some time to come and as a result we expect to see many more CVAs being proposed, particularly in these sectors. The introduction of R3's Standard Form COVID-19 CVA Proposal could lead to an increase in the use of CVAs in the SME market too.

The Supreme Court in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 has brought much needed clarity to the legal basis and scope of the so-called ‘reflective loss’ principle. The effect of the decision is a ‘bright line’ rule that bars claims by shareholders for loss in value of their shares arising as a consequence of the company having suffered loss, in respect of which the company has a cause of action against the same wrong-doer.

A recent decision of the High Court of New Zealand provides helpful guidance for insolvency practitioners on how aspects of the voluntary administration regime should operate in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On 30 March 2020, the board of directors of EncoreFX (NZ) Limited resolved to appoint administrators to the company. By then, New Zealand was already at Level 4 on the four-level alert system for COVID-19.

The UK Court of Appeal has held that legal privilege outlasts the dissolution of a company in Addlesee v Dentons Europe LLP [2019] EWCA Civ 1600.

Legal advice privilege applies to communications between a client and its lawyers. The general rule is that those communications cannot be disclosed to third parties unless and until the client waives the privilege.

The High Court in DHC Assets Ltd v Arnerich [2019] NZHC 1695 recently considered an application under s 301 of the Companies Act (the Act) seeking to recover $1,088,156 against the former director of a liquidated company (Vaco). The plaintiff had a construction contract with Vaco and said it had not been paid for all the work it performed under that contract.

Regan v Brougham [2019] NZCA 401 clarifies what is needed to establish a valid guarantee.

A Term Loan Agreement was entered into whereby Christine Regan and Mark Tuffin lent $50,000 to B & R Enterprises Ltd. Rachael Dey and Bryce Brougham were named as Guarantors. Bryce Brougham was the only guarantor to sign the agreement. The Company was put into liquidation and a demand made against the Guarantor.

The guarantor argued that the guarantee was not enforceable based on the following: