J-curve effect meaning

In this issue: Enforcing security and property insolvency Service charges Disputes and remedies Repairing obligations and dilapidations Residential tenancies Rent and rates Contractual issues Additional Property Disputes updates LexTalk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Latest Q&As Enforcing security and property insolvency Applications for possession and sale of the family home in bankruptcy (Armstrong v Temblett) The matter involved an application by Mr Armstrong, acting as trustee in bankruptcy (the trustee), seeking an order for possession and sale of Mrs Vanessa Temblett’s London property, jointly owned with her husband (the London property). The court determined that, under section 335A of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), the trustee was entitled to possession and sale, as no exceptional circumstances were identified to rebut the statutory presumption that creditors’ interests prevail over other factors. The judgment highlights the need for practitioners...

Britain's top court has rejected efforts by a Russian bankruptcy trustee to overturn a decision that English courts cannot recognise a bankruptcy order. A five-judge panel unanimously dismissed Lyubov Kireeva's bid, brought in her capacity as a Russian bankruptcy trustee, to have English courts acknowledge the bankruptcy order made against Bedzhamov, the former owner of Vneshprombank LLC, which failed in 2016. The appeal turned on the 'immovables rule', an English law principle under which foreign tribunals lack authority over land situated in England, meaning only English courts and property rights law can govern real estate in the country. In a brief oral judgment at Britain's highest court, Justice David Richards concluded that every submission advanced by Kireeva's legal team was 'incompatible with the immovables rule'. At the 2023 hearing, her counsel had urged the court, in this matter, to relax the 'immovables rule' so that English courts could assist overseas insolvency processes and foster co-operation. Richards J, however, stated that any reform 'must be a matter for Parliament...

Jones v Persons Unknown & others [2025] EWHC 1823 (Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment offers clear direction for non-parties affected by judgments, delineating the scope of CPR 40.9 and the considerations the court will weigh when determining whether an application ought to be granted. Particularly noteworthy is the court’s restrictive approach to what qualifies as a ‘direct’ effect for these purposes, despite other authorities appearing to endorse a broader construction, including the decision of Hill J in Shell UK v Persons Unknown [2023] EWHC 1229. In this case, the court rejected the applicant’s argument that the depletion of its assets, arising during satisfaction of a judgment to which it was not subject, rendered it directly affected. Instead, the court held that being directly affected requires the conduct in question to stem immediately from an obligation in the relevant order, or to follow as a direct consequence of that order...

A codicil can be used to amend a Will: alter executors or modify gifts, by adding or removing. As a rule, major revisions are best done through a new Will; codicils suit minor tweaks, like replacing executors or adding a bequest. Yet, even slight adjustments via codicil risk creating uncertainty, so drafting demands caution. In particular, ‘as if’ revocation-style clauses are hazardous; as Megarry J observed in Re Lawrence’s Will Trusts, such wording is a dangerous tool because few draftsmen can anticipate every outcome of rigorously applying the hypothetical scenario it creates. Given that the words ‘as if’ often appear in codicils, proceed with care and consider preparing a fresh Will. Amending one provision can mean other provisions also require revision, so the original Will should be reviewed in the light of any...

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 brought in Part 26A to the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), establishing a fresh statutory restructuring mechanism, the Part 26A restructuring plan (RP), with effect from 26 June 2020. The regime is complemented by the relevant Practice Statement (see Practice Note: The Practice Statement for Part 26 schemes and Part 26A restructuring plans (2025)) and by the Explanatory Notes issued by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (now the Department for Business and Trade), which Snowden J in Re Virgin Atlantic Airways, applying Re Flora v Wakom (Heathrow) Ltd, confirmed, per Snowden J, are admissible as an interpretative aid notwithstanding even without proving ambiguity or obscurity. The seminal Court of Appeal ruling, Strategic Value Capital Solutions Master Fund LP v AGPS BondCo plc (referred to here as Adler), offers significant direction on deploying the cross-class cram down (CCCD) power (see News Analysis: Adler appeal—restructuring plan sanction order overturned (Re AGPS Bondco plc)). Snowden LJ gave the principal judgment (with which Nugee...

The restructuring plan under CA 2006, Part 26A The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020) introduced reforms to insolvency law for limited liability partnerships (LLPs), among them the restructuring plan as a fresh procedure. The architecture of the restructuring plan sits in Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) — Arrangements and Reconstructions for Companies in Financial Difficulty. Interpretation is assisted by the Explanatory Notes, which are admissible without prior need to demonstrate ambiguity or lack of clarity in the statute (per Snowden J in Re Virgin Atlantic Airways, applying Re Flora v Wakom (Heathrow) Ltd). Further guidance stems from the Practice Statement (Companies: Schemes of Arrangement under Part 26 and Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006) issued on 26 June 2020 (Practice Statement 2020). From 1 January 2026, a new Practice Statement will take effect (the New Practice Statement). It promotes earlier identification of jurisdictional and procedural questions, stakeholder communications, and streamlined case management — so that time and resources are deployed proportionately...