|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions >> Discovery (Northampton) Ltd & Ors v Debenhams Retail Ltd & Ors  EWHC 1430 (Ch) (05 June 2020)
Cite as:  EWHC 1430 (Ch)
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND & WALES
INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST (
The Rolls Building
B e f o r e :
| DISCOVERY(NORTHAMPTON) LIMITED
DISCOVERY (NUNEATON) LIMITED
SOUTHAMPTON ESTATES LIMITED
DISCOVERY (TORQUAY) LIMITED
DISCOVERY (FOLKESTONE) LIMITED
DISCOVERY (HARROGATE) LIMITED
|- and -
|DEBENHAMS RETAIL LIMITED
JAMES ROBERT TUCKER
GLAS TRUST CORPORATION LIMITED
Tom Smith QC and Richard Fisher (instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP) for the First Respondent
Andrew Shaw (instructed by Travers Smith LLP) for the Second and Third Respondents
Matthew Abraham (instructed by Baker & McKenzie LLP) for the Fourth Respondent
Written submissions: 7-20 February 2020
Crown Copyright ©
SIR ALASTAIR NORRIS :
(a) An application made on 10 June 2019 by six associated landlords to set aside the Debenhams CVA ("the CVA Challenge Application").
(b) An application by Debenhams dated 27 August 2019 to exclude certain evidence (of Mr Barnes and Mr Rose) adduced in support of the CVA Challenge Application and to eliminate one line of argument advanced in support of the CVA Challenge Application ("the Exclusion Application").
(c) An informal application pursuant to a permission to apply (originally brought by the six landlords but in the event only argued by Southampton Estates Limited ("Southampton")) that I should reconsider my decision in the CVA Challenge Application to sever an unlawful forfeiture provision in the Debenhams CVA ("the Review Application").
(d) An application made on 9 December 2019 by Southampton Estates Limited alone to review the decision on the CVA Challenge Application (under Insolvency Rule 12.59) on the ground that a subsequent decision on a point not argued in the CVA Challenge Application was incompatible with the reasoning of my decision on the CVA Challenge Application ("the Rule 12.59 Application").
(e) An application dated 21 January 2020 by Debenhams to strike out the claims of five of the six applicants for relief in the Review Application (leaving only Southampton Estates Limited) on the ground that one of the five had entered administration and the remaining four of the five were now in receivership ("the Strike-out Application").
The Strike-out Application
The CVA Challenge Application
(a) That both processes are designed to impose a variation of rights upon dissentient creditors.
(b) That even unsuccessful opposition may assist the Court.
(c) That scrutiny by the Court is desirable lest defective CVAs are approved by creditors (as, they said, my judgment showed had happened in many retail CVAs).
The Exclusion Application
The Rule 12.59 Application
The Second and Third Respondents (the Joint Supervisors)
The Fourth Respondent