header-logo header-logo

02 August 2007 / Joseph Ollech
Issue: 7284 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Unfair prejudice

Can a CVA work to release guarantor obligations? ask Joseph Ollech and Helen Bourne

PRG Ltd (PRG) owned a UK subsidiary called PRG Powerhouse Ltd (Powerhouse). Powerhouse acquired more than 100 high street stores and supermarkets in the UK. A number of landlords of these stores took parent company guarantees from PRG in respect of Powerhouse’s obligations under the leases. Powerhouse subsequently decided to close 35 of the stores.

The directors of Powerhouse proposed a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) in relation to creditors who were connected to the 35 stores under which the “closed premises creditors” would be given 28p in the pound. All other creditors of Powerhouse would be unaffected.
The CVA purported to release PRG from all its guarantor obligations to the landlords. The landlords challenged the effectiveness of the CVA to release the parent company from liability in respect of its guarantees to the landlords.

The application arose under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), s 6(1) which states that an application can be made to the court on the grounds that a

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

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Heavyweight patent litigator will bolster Carpmaels Ransford’s rapidly growing Litigation team as firm marks its 250th anniversary

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll