The new month sees a partial re-instatement of the legislation permitting creditors to serve winding up petitions on companies. However, the UK Government has adopted a softly, softly approach; this is seen from the temporary increase in the amount that must be owed from the modest £750 to £10,000 and the requirement for creditors to seek proposals for payment from a debtor business, giving them 21 days for a response, before they can proceed with winding up action. The measures are said to protect small businesses as they seek to rebuild their stability.

Summary

With government support instigated by the Covid-19 pandemic coming to an end, there is an inevitability that some hotel owners will sadly not have the liquidity to continue to operate in the medium term. Eager investors are seeing opportunities and are waiting to deploy capital. We examine the main considerations for investors who are looking to purchase distressed hotel assets out of an insolvency process.

General Introduction

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, legislation was introduced during 2020 to prevent creditors filing statutory demands and winding up petitions on the basis of their debtor's inability to pay its debts, unless it could be shown that non-payment was not a result of the pandemic. These temporary measures had been extended a number of times during the pandemic as businesses continued to suffer the effects of multiple lockdowns and trading restrictions, but are now gradually being phased out.

At the start of the coronavirus pandemic, temporary provisions were put in place under the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 ("CIGA") to allow businesses impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic breathing space from the threat of winding up action. Those restrictions will expire on 30 September 2021.

Good evening.

Following are this week’s summaries of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of September 13, 2021.

The High Court recently refused a winding up petition brought by a landlord against a tenant company that had not paid rent on its commercial premises for more than a year.

Lestown Property Limited v The Companies Act 2014 [2021] IEHC 513.

A dispute arose between a landlord, Lestown Property, and a tenant that operated a Leisureplex in Charlestown Shopping Centre. The Leisureplex was only accessible through the lobby of an adjacent cinema. The cinema was leased to a separate entity and was closed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

An intention to transfer is not sufficient to claim lost property

One of the key questions for an individual facing bankruptcy is how they can protect their assets from the trustee-in-bankruptcy (trustee) or from creditors. This is particularly relevant for the family/matrimonial home. One of the ways of protecting this asset is via the presumption of advancement.

This article explores a recent appeal case where the presumption of advancement, in relation to the family home, was rebutted.

What is the presumption of advancement?

Good afternoon.

Please find below our summaries of the civil decisions of the Ontario Court of Appeal for the week of August 23, 2021.

There were three substantive civil decisions this week. Vu v. Canada (Attorney General) deals with discoverability and limitation periods related to the torts of false arrest and imprisonment. In dismissing the appeal, the Court confirmed the date of an arrest is merely a presumptive date for the commencement of the limitation period – a date that can be rebutted.

SEPTEMBER 2021 THE PRACTICAL REAL ESTATE LAWYER | 49 JOSHUA STEIN, one of the most prolific contributors to The Practical Real Estate Lawyer in its history, handles a wide range of commercial real estate transactions and regularly serves as an expert witness. He is a member of the American College of Real estate Lawyers and author of five books and over 300 articles on commercial real estate law and practice. Many appear on his website, www.joshuastein.com.