header-logo header-logo

Powerhouse CVA branded unfair

10 May 2007
Issue: 7272 / Categories: Legal News , Property
printer mail-detail

A company voluntary arrangement (CVA) which aimed to remove creditors’ rights under guarantee against a parent company has been deemed invalid by the High Court.

In Prudential Assurance Co Ltd & others v PRG Powerhouse Ltd Mr Justice Etherton held that the CVA Powerhouse had used to escape its UK leases at a fraction of the cost was unfairly prejudicial to the landlords.
He said: “The votes of those unsecured creditors who stood to lose nothing from the CVA, and everything to gain from it, inevitably swamped those of the guaranteed landlords who were significantly disadvantaged.”

Powerhouse proposed a CVA to its creditors, an aspect of which relieved its guarantors of any liability for the rent that remained unpaid and the future rent in respect of its loss-making properties until they were re-let. A sufficient percentage of the company’s other creditors were happy with the provisions of the CVA to outvote the landlords and pass it. This left Powerhouse’s landlords bound by the clause relieving the guarantors of responsibility under their guarantees and powerless to object

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll