The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill (“Bill”) published on 20 May 2020 proposes to introduce a number of significant reforms to UK restructuring and insolvency law . The scope of the Bill is wide ranging and includes measures to protect companies in financial difficulty as a result of the current pandemic. Several of the provisions contained in the Bill will have particular impact on the landlord and tenant relationship during the current COVID-19 crisis, which is the focus of this article.

Temporary prohibition against petitions on the basis of statutory demands

In summary

In our previous alert we discussed how Justice Markovic in the Federal Court of Australia had granted the administrators of retailer Colette Group relief from personal liability for rent in respect of 93 stores.  

The Australian Federal Court has made orders relieving the administrators of retailer Colette from personal liability for rent in response to the COVID-19 crisis and the current uncertainty in respect of government policy about rent relief for tenants: see

What you need to know

In brief

The following measures introduced as a COVID-19 response are now to be extended:

This week’s TGIF considers the decision in Strawbridge (Administrator), in the matter of CBCH Group Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) (No 2) [2020] FCA 472 where the Federal Court made orders absolving the administrators of retailer Colette from personal liability for rent for a two week period, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

As the social and economic disruption caused by coronavirus (COVID-19) continues to rapidly evolve, the boards of Australian companies are facing solvency related issues. These issues extend to the solvency of suppliers and customers, and the potential consequences of the appointment of a voluntary administrator.

The NSW Supreme Court has given a Landlord leave to commence proceedings against a company for rent and make good costs arising after the date of the DOCA.

BACKGROUND

Although only a few weeks old, 2013 has already seen HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster enter administration, joining last year's failures, which included Comet, Clinton Cards and Peacocks.  Given the number of premises these companies occupy across the UK, landlords of retail premises will inevitably be affected.

The High Court has ruled in the case of Goldacre (Offices) Limited v Nortel Networks UK Limited (in administration) [2009] that rent for premises that continue to be used for the beneficial outcome of an administration must be paid as an expense of the administration. This decision confirms that the court has no discretion in these circumstances and that it does not matter if only part of the premises are being used. This contrasts with the position where a landlord wishes to take action against a tenant in administration such as bringing forfeiture or injunction proceedings.

This is the third of a series of four e-bulletins in relation to administrations and company voluntary arrangements (CVAs).