Chaptre Finance PLC, In the Matter Of [2024] EWHC 2908 (Ch) (14 November 2024)

Chaptre Finance PLC, In the Matter Of [2024] EWHC 2908 (Ch) (14 November 2024)

The Plan Company satisfied the statutory 'no worse off' test under s.901G(3) Companies Act 2006, as expert evidence (not undermined by cross-examination) showed Senior Creditors would receive nothing in the relevant alternative but a material recovery under the Plan. The Plan was approved by requisite majorities in three classes and opposed only by the out-of-the-money Senior Creditors. The Plan's terms, including changes to the enforcement waterfall, were not unfair. The procedural and evidential requirements were met. The court exercised its discretion to sanction the Plan and bind the dissenting class.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2908 (Ch)
Parties
Plan Company: Chaptre Finance plc; Opposing Creditor: Korea Trade Insurance Corporation (K-Sure); Opposing Creditor: Banco Santander, SA; Opposing Creditor: Institutio de Credit Oficial EPE
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Restructuring Plan Sanction Application / Sanction Hearing Under Part 26 a Companies Act 2006
Outcome
Plan sanctioned; cross-class cram down ordered against dissenting Senior Creditors.
Legal Topics
Restructuring Plan, Cross Class Cram Down, No Worse Off Test, Sanction of Arrangement, Creditor Classes, Expert Evidence, Fairness of Plan
Insolvency Company Law Restructuring Plan Cross Class Cram Down No Worse Off Test Sanction of Arrangement Creditor Classes Expert Evidence +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chaptre Finance plc

Plan Company

Korea Trade Insurance Corporation (K-Sure)

Opposing Creditor

Banco Santander, SA

Opposing Creditor

Institutio de Credit Oficial EPE

Opposing Creditor

Procedural Posture

Restructuring Plan Sanction Application / Sanction Hearing Under Part 26 a Companies Act 2006

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restructuring plan satisfies the 'no worse off' test under section 901G(3) Companies Act 2006 for dissenting Senior Creditors
  2. 2 Whether the plan is fair and should be sanctioned against the dissenting class under the court's discretion
  3. 3 Whether the procedural and evidential requirements for expert evidence were met

Ratio Decidendi

The Plan Company satisfied the statutory 'no worse off' test under s.901G(3) Companies Act 2006, as expert evidence (not undermined by cross-examination) showed Senior Creditors would receive nothing in the relevant alternative but a material recovery under the Plan. The Plan was approved by requisite majorities in three classes and opposed only by the out-of-the-money Senior Creditors. The Plan's terms, including changes to the enforcement waterfall, were not unfair. The procedural and evidential requirements were met. The court exercised its discretion to sanction the Plan and bind the dissenting class.

Court Disposition

Plan sanctioned; cross-class cram down ordered against dissenting Senior Creditors.

Orders

  • The restructuring plan is sanctioned under section 901F Companies Act 2006.
  • The Plan binds all four classes of Plan Creditors, including the dissenting Senior Creditors.