CVA challenges have been in the spotlight recently and the story continues with Nero Holdings Ltd v Young in which the court considered an application to strike out a CVA challenge claim. Although there is nothing ground-breaking in the court’s reasoning to dismiss the strike out/summary judgment application, its detailed reasoning will offer some helpful guidance and assistance to those involved in these applications. It will also be helpful to know, following the hearing of the challenge application, how the Court tackles the position where a modification and/or material development occurs following the circulation of the CVA proposal, in particular where substantial votes have already been cast.
Last night, the UK government 
The recent case of Manolete Partners Plc v Hayward and Barrett Holdings Ltd [2021] EWHC 1481 (Ch) impacts both insolvency practitioners and assignees of insolvency claims, potentially making such claims more expensive to bring and a procedural burden by requiring (depending on the nature of the pleaded claims) two sets of proceedings, even though the claims arise from the same facts.
Both Spain and Italy have introduced recent changes to their insolvency laws.
Three weeks after the introduction of the mandatory requirement to obtain an evaluator’s report or seek creditor approval before completing a substantial disposal of a company’s business or assets to a connected person, we have updated our Q&A to include new answers in light of the Insolvency Service’s guidance and following discussions with our clients. The updated Q&A can be accessed
Following in the footsteps of the New Look CVA challenge judgment (see our blog 
On 12 May 2021, the UK Government introduced the snappily titled “