Following the posting of the article I co-wrote with Morayo Fagborun-Bennett on the Recovery of Commercial and Residential Rent Arrears, there have been a couple of developments of note.

This article follows the #HardwickeBrew on 28th May 2020 which looked at the Corporate Insolvency & Governance Bill. If you would like to take part in future #HardwickeBrews, please sign up via our Events page.

Introduction

1. This note reviews the provisions relating to the moratorium procedure for Great Britain under the draft Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill (“CIGB”).

CIGB

This significant recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada confirms (i) that a CCAA supervising judge enjoys broad discretion and the necessary jurisdiction to prevent a creditor from voting on a plan of arrangement when the creditor is acting for an improper purpose, and (ii) that litigation funding is not intrinsically illegal and that a litigation funding agreement can be approved by the Court as an interim financing in insolvency.

Cette importante décision prononcée dernièrement par la Cour suprême du Canada confirme : (i) que le juge chargé d’appliquer la LACC possède un vaste pouvoir discrétionnaire et la compétence nécessaire pour empêcher un créancier de voter sur un plan d’arrangement s’il agit dans un but illégitime, (ii) que le financement de litiges n’est pas intrinsèquement illégal et qu’un accord de financement de litige peut être approuvé par la Cour à titre de financement temporaire en situation d’insolvabilité.

This significant recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada confirms (i) that a CCAA supervising judge enjoys broad discretion and the necessary jurisdiction to prevent a creditor from voting on a plan of arrangement when the creditor is acting for an improper purpose, and (ii) that litigation funding is not intrinsically illegal and that a litigation funding agreement can be approved by the Court as an interim financing in insolvency.

Re Debenhams Retail Limited (In Administration) [2020] EWCA Civ. 600

In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the British Columbia Supreme Court (the “Court”) has suspended regular operations at all of its locations from March 19^th, 2020 to May 29^th, 2020 (the “Suspension Period”).^[1] In an effort to balance the seriousness of the situation with the principles of open courts and timely access to justice, the Court continues to hear certain “urgen

In these unprecedented times there has been much discussion and focus in the property community of the effect of tenants unable to operate their businesses and the risks of widescale insolvencies.

Re Debenhams Retail Limited [2020] EWHC 921 (Ch)

The Carluccio’s judgment provides some much-needed clarity on the interrelation of the Furlough Scheme and the requirements of insolvency legislation. It is to be commended for its clarity and for the fact that it had to construe the workings of the Furlough Scheme in the absence of any statutory guidance as to its implementation. It is to be hoped that, when the Government comes to enact the necessary legislative measures (including perhaps amendments to Schedule B1 and IR 2016), that it does so with this judgment very firmly in mind.