Although the Sunbird scheme of arrangement was approved by the relevant creditors, sanction was refused by Mr. Justice Snowdon, who highlighted:

• a ‘paucity of information provided by the company as part of the scheme process’, and
• a failure to engage with creditors ‘whom the directors clearly felt were irrelevant or would be an obstacle to their plans’.

He remarked that the company’s approach 'fell a considerable distance short of what was required for a fair process'.

Following yesterday’s announcement that a number of the temporary measures brought in by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (CIGA) to ease pressures on companies most at risk of insolvency during the ongoing Covid-19 crisis are to be extended, we look here at some of the key questions arising under CIGA in the context of the commercial landlord and tenant relationship.

Despite commentators’ recent focus on the new Part 26A restructuring plan, introduced in late June by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020, the scheme of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 (“scheme”) remains a popular tool for companies to reach a compromise or arrangement with their creditors and/or its members.

I. Introduction

Complex restructurings are no stranger to colorful facts and unpredictable twists and turns. But few lead to criminal charges. Fewer still involve criminal charges against the chairman of the unsecured creditors’ committee, alleging that he abused his position to benefit himself financially.

New Look's unsecured creditors today approved a company voluntary arrangement that will amend 402 store leases to a turnover rent model, reflecting recent movements in the market towards more flexible lease obligations.

Despite opposition from many landlords, and considerable disquiet in the property industry, it is clear that tenants remain open to using the CVA process to restructure their leases, as a means to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The English Supreme Court has handed down its long-awaited judgment in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd. The key issue the case has dealt with is the scope of the reflective loss principle in English law. This might not mean much to the average person, but the decision is potentially ground-breaking for creditors of companies seeking justice. This short article explains why.

The reflective loss principle

Introduction

Virgin Atlantic announced yesterday its plans for a recapitalisation, worth approximately £1.2 billion over the next 18 months. Support has already been secured from the majority of stakeholders.

However, to secure approval from all relevant creditors before implementation, Virgin Atlantic plans to use the new 'restructuring plan' as introduced by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA), which came into force late last month.

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (the ‘CIGA’), which came into force on 26 June 2020, introduces the most significant changes to English insolvency law in a generation. In this article, we explore those changes in a ‘question and answer’ format.

At a glance – what has changed?

The CIGA has introduced permanent changes to English legislation that will ensure that England & Wales remains at the forefront of the global restructuring market. These measures are:

At present, global businesses face huge amounts of uncertainty owing to the Covid-19 crisis that is influencing the global economy in an unprecedented manner. From contractual supply chain issues, which have led to the activation of force majeure clauses, among others, to employment issues, insurance disputes, and the real and imminent threat of insolvency of counterparties, businesses need to take quick, effective steps to avoid trouble in these difficult times.