Project Verona Ltd, Re [2024] EWHC 2080 (Ch) (04 June 2024)

Project Verona Ltd, Re [2024] EWHC 2080 (Ch) (04 June 2024)

The plan satisfies the statutory requirements for sanction under Part 26A CA 2006, including the cross-class cram down provisions. The relevant alternative is administration, in which unsecured creditors would receive nothing. The plan offers a better outcome to all classes, and no creditor has advanced a substantive objection or demonstrated unfairness in the allocation of restructuring benefits. The court is satisfied that the plan is fair and reasonable and sanctions it accordingly.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2080 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant: Project Verona Limited; Creditor: Secured Creditor; Creditor: Category B Landlords; Creditor: Category C Landlords; Creditor: Category A Rating Authority Creditors; Creditor: Category B Rating Authority Creditors; Creditor: Category C Rating Authority Creditors; Creditor: Non-Critical Creditors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Sanction Application for Restructuring Plan Under Part 26 a Companies Act 2006 / Sanction Hearing (final Approval)
Outcome
Plan sanctioned
Legal Topics
Restructuring Plan, Cross Class Cram Down, Sanction of Scheme, Relevant Alternative, Fair Distribution of Restructuring Surplus
Insolvency Company Law Restructuring Plan Cross Class Cram Down Sanction of Scheme Relevant Alternative Fair Distribution of Restructuring Surplus

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

Parties

Project Verona Limited

Applicant

Secured Creditor

Creditor

Category B Landlords

Creditor

Category C Landlords

Creditor

Category A Rating Authority Creditors

Creditor

Category B Rating Authority Creditors

Creditor

Category C Rating Authority Creditors

Creditor

Non-Critical Creditors

Creditor

Procedural Posture

Sanction Application for Restructuring Plan Under Part 26 a Companies Act 2006 / Sanction Hearing (final Approval)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statutory requirements for sanctioning a restructuring plan under Part 26A CA 2006 are met
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to sanction the plan including cross-class cram down
  3. 3 Whether the plan is fair and does not unfairly prejudice dissenting classes

Ratio Decidendi

The plan satisfies the statutory requirements for sanction under Part 26A CA 2006, including the cross-class cram down provisions. The relevant alternative is administration, in which unsecured creditors would receive nothing. The plan offers a better outcome to all classes, and no creditor has advanced a substantive objection or demonstrated unfairness in the allocation of restructuring benefits. The court is satisfied that the plan is fair and reasonable and sanctions it accordingly.

Court Disposition

Plan sanctioned

Orders

  • The restructuring plan under Part 26A Companies Act 2006 is sanctioned.