The real estate industry forms a significant portion of the flourishing Indian economy. However, it is also plagued with inordinate delays, cash-flow issues and anguished homebuyers. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (“IBBI”) has recently added to the array of steps being taken to address these issues. 

For RSLs who are routinely contracting with housebuilders for golden brick delivery of affordable housing across multiple phases, we discuss the four key actions that can help if the housebuilder becomes insolvent.

1. Pre-Insolvency – Financial Distress Provisions and Due Diligence

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in Anjani Kumar Prashar v. Manab Datta & Ors, Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.

Bankruptcy Code Section 502(b)(6) establishes a Statutory Cap on the damages a landlord can claim arising from the termination of a lease in bankruptcy case. Courts have split on how to calculate the Statutory Cap, whether and how to apply letters of credit to reduce the Statutory Cap, and whether the Statutory Cap applies to a landlord’s claims against a lessee’s debtor-guarantor.

On March 26, 2024, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York issued an opinion addressing the foregoing issues:

The Porter Davis liquidation in early 2023 put into sharp focus the practice of some builders taking deposits from owners before obtaining domestic building insurance for their work, insurance that helps to protect owners in the event of a builder’s insolvency.

In the case of Porter Davis, this practice left thousands of owners without insurance to recover the loss of their deposits, leading the State Government to implement a relief scheme to compensate home owners over $28 million, later extended to 20 February 2024 and expanded to other builders in liquidation.

When a bankruptcy debtor rejects a lease, a landlord is entitled to a rejection damages claim. Under Section 502(b)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code, a landlord’s claim is capped at “the rent reserved by such lease, without acceleration, for the greater of one year, or 15%, not to exceed three years, of the remaining term of such lease.”

Courts have taken two different approaches in interpreting what constitutes the “15%” in the statute: (A) the remaining rent due under the lease; or (B) the remaining time under the lease.

The “Rent Approach”

The decision in RPPS v Brookfield is the first recorded instance of s 151 of the PPSA being enforced (with a $30,000 penalty imposed for an improper registration). It serves as a caution to those making spurious registrations, but reasonably diligent and responsible parties should have no cause for alarm.

The Federal Court has recently delivered judgment in the case of Cooper as Liquidator of Runtong Investment and Development Pty Ltd (In Liq)v CEG Direct Securities Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 6, a case where a liquidator was successful in having a mortgage declared as an unreasonable director-related transaction.

Key Takeaways

Landlords might be starting to feel a little uneasy given the news that Superdry is considering a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA). Superdry is reportedly working with accountants to hash out a plan that will likely involve shutting down certain stores and cutting rent liabilities. The accountants instructed will be exploring whether either a CVA or a Restructuring Plan - both of which are processes which allow businesses to seek to reduce their liabilities to creditors – would be appropriate.

What exactly is a CVA?

引言：2023年8月17日，某中资地产集团依据《美国法典（United States Code）》第11编第15章向纽约南区破产法院（United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York）申请启动破产保护程序。破产保护程序作为一种辅助程序，并非在美国司法辖区内进行的完整破产程序，而是债务人向美国法院申请承认外国程序的工具。本文拟从某中资地产集团危机事件展开，分篇探究企业动用美国法下跨境承认工具的潜在动因，亦就债务人、债权人在中资离岸房企跨境破产重组中的关注问题加以浅析。

一、 事实背景

2023年8月17日，某注册于开曼群岛的中资地产集团（下称“中资集团”）依据《美国法典》第11编第15章1向纽约南区破产法院申请启动对集团及其注册于香港、英属维尔京群岛的两家子公司的破产保护程序。申请由集团公司秘书、子公司独立董事各自以“外国授权代表”（Foreign Representative）身份提出，请求纽约南区破产法院认可该等实体在美国境外提起的债务重组程序。公开信息检索及法院文件显示，中资集团提交的破产保护申请仅涉及地产集团及该两家海外子公司，而不涉及地产集团旗下的其它公司（包括其中国大陆子公司）。