header-logo header-logo

At the Sharples end?

15 September 2011 / Christopher Warenius
Issue: 7481 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

How are the interests of insolvent tenants balanced with those of their landlords, asks Christopher Warenius

In the current economic climate, landlords are frequently faced with tenants in financial difficulty. Often these tenants may resort to formal insolvency procedures such as bankruptcy. Formal insolvency mechanisms are designed to provide a degree of protection both for the insolvent party and for their unsecured creditors, who may have competing claims. Landlords can be among the most vulnerable of a tenant’s unsecured creditors because the tenant is in their property and it is difficult to end an ongoing contractual relationship with the financially unsound party. The question often arises as to whose interests take precedence in this situation.

Section 285(3) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) provides such a mechanism. It restricts legal recourse against the insolvent party once a bankruptcy order has been made by providing that: (3)…no person who is a creditor of the bankrupt in respect of a debt provable in the bankruptcy shall—(a) have any remedy against the property or person

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll