Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • Regions
      • Africa
      • Asia Pacific
      • Europe
      • North Africa/Middle East
      • North America
      • South America
    • Headlines
    • Education Resources
      • ABI Committee Articles
      • ABI Journal Articles
      • Covid 19
      • Conferences and Webinars
      • Newsletters
      • Publications
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    Incorporate amended legislation
    2009-09-15

    In the case of William Hare Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd [2009] EWHC 1603 (TCC) (25 June 2009), the court declined to incorporate amendments made to an Act before the contract was signed which were not specifically referred to in the contract.

    The facts

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Construction, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Gowling WLG, Statutory interpretation, Withholding tax, Best practice, Constitutional amendment, Insolvency Act 1986 (UK), High Court of Justice
    Authors:
    David Lowe
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Gowling WLG
    EMI case settles out of court the decision that a tenant cannot assign its lease to its guarantor still stands
    2017-06-02

    In 2016 the High Court considered the validity of an assignment of a lease by a tenant to its guarantor. The antiavoidance provisions in section 25 of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 ("1995 Act") strictly limit the freedom of contract of parties to leases governed by that Act, broadly, those granted after 1995. Agreements which frustrate those provisions are void even if they are commercially justifiable.

    BRIEF FACTS AND DECISION

    EMI Group Limited v O&H Q1 Limited [2016] EWHC 529 (Ch)

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Public, Real Estate, DLA Piper, Landlord, Leasehold estate, Covenant (law), Liquidation, EMI, Court of Appeal of England & Wales, High Court of Justice
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    DLA Piper
    Lehman Brothers International (Europe) in administration: latest High Court decisions on application of surplus proceeds in the ‘Waterfall’ series of cases
    2015-08-04

    On 31 July 2015, the English High Court delivered its judgments in the ‘Waterfall IIA’ and ‘Waterfall IIB’ cases. The decisions are important to stakeholders in determining key questions about how, following payment in 2014 of all the provable claims, the estimated £7.39-billion surplus (the ‘Surplus’) in Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration) (‘LBIE’) will be shared amongst them. For others, the decisions may be of general interest in probing some rarely aired legal issues relating to the lower levels of the insolvency payment waterfall.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Lehman Brothers, High Court of Justice
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    U.K. Appeals Court expands scope of client money pool and universe of clients eligible for client money pool distributions
    2010-08-10

    The U.K. Court of Appeal (the “Court of Appeal”) on Aug. 2, 2010, handed down a long-awaited decision regarding an appeal related to the scope of, and eligibility to receive distributions from, the Lehman Brothers Europe (International) (“LBIE”) pool of client money. Lehman Bros. Int. (Europe) (In Administration) v CRC Credit Fund Ltd. & Ors, [2010] EWCA Civ 917 (appeal taken from the Chancery Division) (U.K.).

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Debtor, Dividends, Investment company, Pro rata, Lehman Brothers, FSA, Court of Appeal of England & Wales, High Court of Justice
    Authors:
    Lawrence V. Gelber , Ron Feldman
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Notice of intended dividend; bar date of December 31, 2010, established for preferential and unsecured claims against LBIE
    2010-01-06

    The Joint Administrators (the “Administrators”) of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (“LBIE”) have issued a notice, dated December 4, 2009 (the “Notice”), pursuant to Rule 2.95(1) of the U.K. Insolvency Rules 1986, announcing their intent to make a distribution (by payment of an interim dividend) to preferential creditors (if any) and unsecured, non-preferential creditors of LBIE. The Notice was authorized on December 2, 2009, by an order of the High Court of Justice (Companies Court) in London (the “U.K. Court Order”).

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Unsecured debt, Dividends, Debt, Lehman Brothers, High Court of Justice
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Claim resolution agreement, segregated assets, U.K. high court rulings
    2009-12-17

    As previously described in our Alert of Oct.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Share (finance), Conflict of laws, Unsecured debt, Debt, Liquidation, Election, Pro rata, Lehman Brothers, High Court of Justice
    Authors:
    Lawrence V. Gelber , Craig Stein , Ron Feldman
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    LBIE Administrators announce contractual alternative to proposed Scheme of Arrangement
    2009-10-06

    The Joint Administrators (the “Administrators”) of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (“LBIE”) announced on Oct. 5, 2009, that they are developing a contractual (i.e., non-judicial) alternative to their proposed Scheme of Arrangement, which is the subject of an appeal following a decision by the High Court in London that it lacks jurisdiction to implement the scheme.

    The Prior Proposed Scheme of Arrangement

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Contractual term, Lehman Brothers, High Court of Justice
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Court permits successive notices of intention to appoint an administrator - but warns of sanctions for abuse
    2010-05-13

    His Honour Judge Purle QC in Re Cornercare Limited [2010] EWHC 393 (CH) has clarified English law on the filing of successive notices of intention to appoint administrators. He has held that there is nothing in the relevant provisions of the Insolvency Act 1986 ("IA 1986") to prevent the filing of successive notices of intention to appoint administrators, where the original notice of intention to appoint an administrator had not been acted upon for good reason.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Hogan Lovells, Debtor, Landlord, Abuse of process, Moratorium (law), Asset forfeiture, Insolvency Act 1986 (UK), High Court of Justice
    Authors:
    Joe Bannister , Daniel Norris , Mathew Ditchburn
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Hogan Lovells
    BHS Company Voluntary Arrangement - Landlords Win on Penalties
    2018-03-07

    Collapsed retailer British Home Stores cannot challenge its own company voluntary arrangement as an unenforceable contractual penalty and must repay rental discounts to its landlords, the High Court in England and Wales decided yesterday.

    The case, in which Hogan Lovells represented the successful landlord, provides important guidance on the operation of company voluntary arrangements (CVAs), particularly after termination, and the payment of rent as an expense of a company’s administration in priority to other debts.

    CVAs

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Real Estate, Hogan Lovells, High Court of Justice
    Authors:
    Mathew Ditchburn , Benjamin Willis
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Hogan Lovells
    Expert evidence in lease renewals worth every pound
    2016-04-12

    A rare High Court decision on an unopposed lease renewal under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 has underlined the importance of robust and thorough expert evidence – and the dangers of getting this wrong.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Real Estate, Hogan Lovells, High Court of Justice
    Authors:
    Paul Tonkin
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Hogan Lovells

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 9
    • Page 10
    • Page 11
    • Page 12
    • Current page 13
    • Page 14
    • Page 15
    • Page 16
    • Page 17
    • …
    • Next page ››
    • Last page Last »
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days