The continuing harsh economic conditions see more and more businesses going into examinership. Examinership has serious implications for landlords.
Ireland has a temporary insolvency process known as “court protection” and commonly called examinership. This provides a breathing space within which a court will determine whether parts of the business can survive after restructuring. This may entail existing leases being disclaimed. The recent case of Bestseller Retail Ireland Limited gives an interesting example of how the court will exercise its discretion in considering an application to disclaim a lease.
Background
Last week the Supreme Court overturned Mr Justice McGovern's recent decision in the Linen Supply of Ireland examinership that the current legislation does not permit the repudiation of leases in an examinership. The case has now been remitted back to the High Court to consider whether, in the specific case before it, the leases ought to be repudiated in order for a scheme of arrangement to be formulated.
In a recent decision of the Supreme Court in the Matter of Linen Supply of Ireland Limited (the “Company”) and the Companies (Amendment) Act 1990 (as amended), the Court finally clarified the law in relation to a company’s ability to repudiate and/or disclaim leases during the course of an examinership process. Earlier decisions of the High Court, including quite recently the O’Brien’s Sandwich Bar decision, had created uncertainty in this area.
INTRODUCTION
Many practitioners may not think of stamp duty as a particular risk when taking on a liquidation or a receivership and there is limited published guidance on the topic. Against a background of an increasing number of business failures including companies operating in property development it is likely that liquidators and receivers will be faced with stamp duty issues on a more frequent basis. The purpose of this article is to identify some areas where practitioners may encounter stamp duty issues.
PROOF OF TITLE
According to a ruling handed down recently by the Israeli Supreme Court, when a real estate asset is sold before the seller enters bankruptcy proceedings, and the seller has not paid the betterment tax, the local council is not obligated to grant the buyer approval for registering the property under his name. Thus, the buyer will be required to pay the betterment tax.
Parte I: Liquidazione del fondo e responsabilità
Quando si parla di liquidazione di un fondo di investimento alternativo (“FIA”) immobiliare ci si riferisce, in generale, al procedimento che porta all’estinzione di quel peculiare centro di imputazione di posizioni giuridiche soggettive che è il FIA stesso.
Nel quinto appuntamento con lo studio di Francesco Calabria sulla liquidazione dei fondi immobiliari, Francesco illustra gli strumenti di prevenzione e mitigazione delle responsabilità post liquidazione.
Stabilite le modalità con le quali si intende dare attuazione al programma di liquidazione di un FIA, il secondo passaggio fondamentale da effettuarsi a cura della SGR riguarda l’individuazione di appropriati strumenti di prevenzione delle responsabilità patrimoniali che potranno emergere successivamente alla chiusura della procedura di liquidazione.
Continua l’appuntamento con lo studio di Francesco Calabria sulla liquidazione dei fondi immobiliari. Nel quarto approfondimento, Francesco illustra il rapporto tra liquidazione e tipi di fondi.
Nel sesto appuntamento sulla liquidazione dei fondi immobiliari, Francesco Calabria ci parla delle questioni che hanno generato contenziosi sull’argomento.