Thames Water Utilities Holdings Limited (Consequentials hearing), Re

Thames Water Utilities Holdings Limited (Consequentials hearing), Re

The court approved the restructuring plan in its existing form, finding that the proposed information rights amendment was adequate and that the releases should remain unchanged to avoid undermining the plan's purpose. Permission to appeal was granted on targeted grounds to ensure scrutiny of valuation findings and legal reasoning, given public interest.

Parties
Plan Company: Thames Water Utilities Holdings Limited; Class a AHG: Group of Class A Plan Creditors; Supporting Bank Group: Supporting Bank Group; Class B AHG: Group of Class B Creditors; Interested Party: Thames Water Limited; Objector: Charlie Maynard MP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Restructuring Plan Application / Consequentials Hearing
Outcome
Plan approved in existing form; permission to appeal granted on specified grounds.
Legal Topics
Restructuring Plan, Information Rights, Releases, Permission to Appeal
Insolvency Company Law Restructuring Plan Information Rights Releases Permission to Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thames Water Utilities Holdings Limited

Plan Company

Group of Class A Plan Creditors

Class a AHG

Supporting Bank Group

Supporting Bank Group

Group of Class B Creditors

Class B AHG

Thames Water Limited

Interested Party

Charlie Maynard MP

Objector

Procedural Posture

Restructuring Plan Application / Consequentials Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Adequacy of information rights for creditors
  2. 2 Scope and effect of releases under the restructuring plan
  3. 3 Permission to appeal and grounds thereof

Ratio Decidendi

The court approved the restructuring plan in its existing form, finding that the proposed information rights amendment was adequate and that the releases should remain unchanged to avoid undermining the plan's purpose. Permission to appeal was granted on targeted grounds to ensure scrutiny of valuation findings and legal reasoning, given public interest.

Court Disposition

Plan approved in existing form; permission to appeal granted on specified grounds.

Orders

  • Class B AHG given 48 hours to respond to information rights amendment, Plan Company and Class A AHG given 24 hours to reply.
  • Plan to be sealed immediately after final form of order decided.