header-logo header-logo

15 September 2011 / Christopher Warenius
Issue: 7481 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

At the Sharples end?

How are the interests of insolvent tenants balanced with those of their landlords, asks Christopher Warenius

In the current economic climate, landlords are frequently faced with tenants in financial difficulty. Often these tenants may resort to formal insolvency procedures such as bankruptcy. Formal insolvency mechanisms are designed to provide a degree of protection both for the insolvent party and for their unsecured creditors, who may have competing claims. Landlords can be among the most vulnerable of a tenant’s unsecured creditors because the tenant is in their property and it is difficult to end an ongoing contractual relationship with the financially unsound party. The question often arises as to whose interests take precedence in this situation.

Section 285(3) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) provides such a mechanism. It restricts legal recourse against the insolvent party once a bankruptcy order has been made by providing that: (3)…no person who is a creditor of the bankrupt in respect of a debt provable in the bankruptcy shall—(a) have any remedy against the property or person of the bankrupt in respect of that debt, or (b)

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll