Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court: (i) sanctions a proposed scheme of arrangement between the company and certain of it creditors to deal with liquidity issues brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, on the grounds that: (a) the Court had jurisdiction to approve the proposed scheme as the Scheme Company was a designated activity company incorporated under Irish law with its registered office in Ireland; (b) in entering into the Deed of Indemnity and Contribution (as amended), the Scheme Company was not taking on any additional liability for which it was not already liable prior to entering into the deed or which it did not have an ability to mitigate against or to control; (c) the inclusion of the ancillary releases in the Amended Scheme did not undermine the status of that scheme as a “compromise or arrangement" or otherwise deprive the court of jurisdiction to consider it and (d) the Court was satisfied that all of the five requirements necessary for the court to approve a scheme of arrangement were fulfilled; and (ii) directs that a certificate be issued certifying that the court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the application on the grounds that the court had jurisdiction in relation to the Amended Scheme under the provisions of the Brussels Recast Regulation.
Application for the approval a proposed scheme of arrangement between the Company and certain of its creditors - s. 453 of the Companies Act, 2014 - the Scheme Company is a major aircraft leasing company based in Limerick whose business has been severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic - scheme was aimed at relieving covenant pressure and maximising liquidity brought on by the pandemic within the applicant group - the scheme was unanimously approved at both meetings of the scheme creditors - whether the Irish Courts had jurisdiction to sanction the proposed scheme - whether the Deed of Indemnity and Contribution had any effect on the Court's ability to approve the proposed scheme - whether the inclusion of the ancillary releases impacted the court’s jurisdiction to sanction the scheme - whether the Company complied with the five required factors necessary for the application - Article 53 of Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012 (the “Brussels Recast Regulation”) - whether the amended Scheme fell within Article 1 of the Brussels Recast Regulation -whether the court had jurisdiction to sanction the Amended Scheme under Chapter II of the Brussels Recast Regulation, in circumstances where some of the Scheme Creditors were domiciled in other Member States of the European Union - Court orders that the Amended Scheme be sanctioned - Court directs that a certificate be issued certifying that the court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the application pursuant to Article 1(1), Article 4 and Article 8(1) of that Regulation.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only fast reporting service for all Irish judgments over the past ten years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now