Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
According to Alex Rogan, an associate in the corporate restructuring team at Skadden, the Van Gansewinkel judgment is the latest example of a trend in recent years for schemes of arrangement to be successfully used to restructure the English law governed financial obligations of overseas companies that do not have their centre of main interest (COMI), or an establishment, or any significant assets in England.
Re Van Gansewinkel Groep B.V and others  EWHC 2151 (Ch),  All ER (D) 241 (Jul)
The Chancery Division held that, in all the circumstances, it had jurisdiction and it was appropriate to exercise its discretion to sanction cross-border schemes of arrangement in respect of the group, Van Gansewinkel Groep BV. The scheme creditors could be regarded as coming within the jurisdiction of the English court under Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, art 8(1) (Brussels I (recast)) for the purposes of the exercise of the scheme jurisdiction in relation to them. The court further considered the proper approach, in practice, to applying for the sanction of schemes of arrangement where jurisdictional issues might be involved.
What is the background to the schemes?
The case concerned an application for the sanction of inter-conditional schemes of arrangement for five Dutch companies and one Belgian company in the Van Gansewinkel Group. The schemes were a necessary part of the steps required to enable an urgent restructuring of the group's financial indebtedness. The scheme companies did not have their COMI, or any establishment, or any significant assets in England -nevertheless, the terms of their debt documentation were governed by English law.
What practical guidance did the judge give on best practice for schemes applications?
This judgment provides welcome guidance on best practice for scheme applications and in particular will assist practitioners to identify which matters they will be required to bring to the court's attention. In particular it sets out a number of points relating to the so called 'Practice Statement Letter' and the amount of information that should
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
0330 161 1234