Restructuring Plans

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

Part 26A restructuring plans (RPs) have been available since June 2020 following their introduction under the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 which introduced a new section into the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Post Brexit, they are an important part of the restructuring toolkit and have seen an exponential growth, with valued guidance being issued by the courts.

In June 2023, the Insolvency Service noted several areas where further consultation may be beneficial on RPs including: (i) exploration of whether the financial burden could be eased (to reduce the costs associated with setting up and challenging an RP) (ii) a lead company concept with jurisdiction extending to affiliated companies (iii) mandatory upside sharing (ie creditors to receive a share of future profit should the rescue be successful). The Insolvency Service also recommended further guidance to help improve trust and transparency with the process to avoid the information asymmetry which exists between the company and challenging creditors/other parties (see para [4.18]) (see: LNB News 28/06/2023 41 and News Analysis: CIGA turns three).

From 1 January 2026, the revised Practice Statement for schemes and RPs 2025

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Restructuring & Insolvency News

Application of the 'Lundy Granite' principle to termination/close out scenarios (Conway v Plass)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The High Court (Chancery Division) held that Joint Special Administrators of Argentex LLP would not incur liability (to be treated as an administration expense) either by not performing Trading Book contracts or by closing out customer contracts. Applying the Lundy Granite principle, mere non-performance of contracts does not create administration expenses without positive conduct showing election. The court's objective analysis found no benefit to the administration estate from closing out contracts. The judgment provides essential guidance on when liabilities become administration expenses, particularly clarifying that administrative convenience alone does not constitute sufficient benefit to the estate. Practical implications written by Aziz Abdul and Paddy Bird of Addleshaw Goddard.

Failed challenge to office-holder’s remuneration payable from fixed charge realisations (Pagden v Ridgley)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The High Court confirmed that amounts paid to an administrator by way of remuneration and expenses for the realisation of fixed charge assets cannot be challenged under Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024, r 18.34, which only concerns remuneration that is payable to an administrator in respect of the administration of assets as part of the insolvency process, from the company’s assets. While this decision confirms existing principle and practice, challenges remain possible through other routes, including under paragraphs 74 and 75 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). Practical implications written by Sam Fenwick, partner, and Yasin Khan, solicitor apprentice, of Wedlake Bell LLP.

Injunctive relief necessary to protect integrity of English jurisdiction (Altrad Investment Authority SAS and others v Protopapas and others)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The High Court granted declarations and injunctive relief to protect the English jurisdiction from foreign proceedings that sought to undermine settled English authority. Mr Justice Marcus Smith held that exceptional circumstances justified interference where a South Carolina receivership constituted a collateral attack on established English precedent. The judgment reinforces the court’s readiness to use declaratory and injunctive remedies against foreign overreach, confirms that ‘long-arm’ receiverships lacking proper connection will not be recognised, and upholds corporate separateness principles from Adams v Cape. Written by Justin Perring of New Square Chambers.

Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights—23 October 2025

This week's edition of Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights includes: analysis of the court’s decision confirming that liquidators cannot limit their liability in their engagement terms (Pagden v Fry), the court’s judgment on an application by trustees in bankruptcy seeking annulment of a bankruptcy order, as they could not recover the bankruptcy estate located in Austria because Austrian courts refused to recognise the bankruptcy order (Nilsson (as joint trustees in bankruptcy of Timothy Edward Jones) v Jones), plus a round-up of other news and cases for restructuring and insolvency professionals.

View Restructuring & Insolvency by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Effect of equitable, contractual and structural subordination

Effect of equitable, contractual and structural subordinationSenior creditors will ensure that in addition to having better security rights over junior creditors, juniors are also subordinated to them, ie the priority of claims against the debtor is changed so that junior creditors creditor agree

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

If a beneficiary signs a deed of disclaimer of their share of an estate and the estate pays their legal

If a beneficiary signs a deed of disclaimer of their share of an estate and the estate pays their legal fees, will that count as a PET against their estate?A disclaimer is the refusal of a gift prior to acceptance. The refusal of the gift must take place before the beneficiary accepts any benefit

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?A limited company having a share capital may not alter that share capital, except in the ways listed in section 617 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Shares in a company cannot simply be cancelled without following an
Effect of equitable, contractual and structural subordination

Effect of equitable, contractual and structural subordination

Effect of equitable, contractual and structural subordinationSenior creditors will ensure that in addition to having better security rights over junior creditors, juniors are also subordinated to them, ie the priority of claims against the debtor is changed so that junior creditors creditor agree

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

If a beneficiary signs a deed of disclaimer of their share of an estate and the estate pays their legal

If a beneficiary signs a deed of disclaimer of their share of an estate and the estate pays their legal

If a beneficiary signs a deed of disclaimer of their share of an estate and the estate pays their legal fees, will that count as a PET against their estate?A disclaimer is the refusal of a gift prior to acceptance. The refusal of the gift must take place before the beneficiary accepts any benefit

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?A limited company having a share capital may not alter that share capital, except in the ways listed in section 617 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Shares in a company cannot simply be cancelled without following an