This edition of Global Insight comes to you shortly after the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union.
A GUIDE TO RESTRUCTURING ISSUES FOR NOT-FOR-PROFIT COMPANIES AND THEIR DIRECTORS 02 | A GUIDE TO RESTRUCTURING ISSUES FOR NOT-FOR-PROFIT COMPANIES AND THEIR DIRECTORS An increasing number of not-for-profit (NFP) entities, including those in the education and healthcare industries, are facing financial challenges that may require restructuring of existing debt loads.
In recent months, the US has seen a staggering increase in the number of retailers, both large and small, filing for bankruptcy. Among others, Dots, Alco Stores, Radio Shack, Deb Shops, Wet Seal, and Delia’s have each filed for bankruptcy protection in the past six months alone.
Understanding and managing the risks of an insolvent acquisition
OPPORTUNITY ARISES OUT OF ADVERSITY
The recent global financial crisis has seen consumers tighten their belts and the retail industry as a whole has faced increasing pressure. Profits warnings have peppered the financial pages and fashion retailers, in both the budget and luxury sectors, have been subject to formal insolvency processes.
In order to assess whether or not an insurance company is in a state of insolvency, the yardstick to be used is not the same as for any other enterprise.
Since Nortel Networks Corporation and a number of related companies (together, “Nortel”), initiated a reorganization under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”) over two years ago, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (the “MOE”) has sought to hold Nortel responsible to remediate environmental contamination remaining on properties once or currently owned by Nortel. Nortel has maintained that its responsibility for the environmental contamination should not be prioritized ahead of its other obligations.
In MNP Ltd. v. Canada Revenue Agency (MNP v CRA), the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench (“ABQB”) clarified the effect of bankruptcy on a writ of enforcement’s “binding interest” acquired on registration against a debtor’s land, ultimately holding that whatever priority a writ’s binding interest has before bankruptcy, it is undercut by the debtor’s bankruptcy. In so doing, the ABQB reaffirmed the validity of a “priority flip” between secured creditors and unsecured judgment creditors upon a debtor’s bankruptcy.
Background
The restructuring market has been eagerly anticipating the judgments in the New Look and Regis CVA challenges. The New Look judgment was handed down on 10 May 2021 and the Regis Judgment followed on 17 May 2021. This article briefly sets out the issues in the New Look CVA challenge, the decision of Mr Justice Zacaroli and what this means for the future of CVAs.
Overview of the New Look CVA Challenge
The claim brought by the Applicants (a consortium of compromised landlords) can be summarised briefly under three heads of claim:
On 17 October 2020 the coronavirus amendments1 came into effect after being signed by the President of Ukraine. The amendments temporarily change the Code on Bankruptcy Proceedings to protect Ukrainian businesses and mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
With effect from 17 October 2020, throughout the quarantine period and 90 days thereafter, the following changes will apply to the bankruptcy process:
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 introduces a range of changes to UK insolvency law of a magnitude not seen since the reforms of the Enterprise Act 2002. One of the reforms included in the Act is a wide ranging prohibition on the operation of termination clauses in contracts for the supply of goods and/or services where the counterparty enters a relevant insolvency process.
What do the provisions do?
Under the new provisions, suppliers will be prevented from: