Powered by Lexis+®
CASE STUDY

“We have to become more agile as our clients' expectations and requirements change. The only thing we know is that tomorrow is going to be different and we must be prepared. With LexisNexis, I feel more confident of that we're ready every time.”

Wolverhampton County Council

Access all documents on Use or lose clause

Use or lose clause meaning

What does Use or lose clause mean?
A use or lose clause is a timetable provision requiring creditors or members to take specified steps by a stated bar date—typically filing a proof of debt, proxy, or notice of claim/interest—failing which their vote on a restructuring proposal will be disregarded. Also called a snooze and lose clause, it is not a statutory term but a descriptive label used across multiple contexts. In England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland it commonly features in schemes of arrangement (Companies Act 2006, Part 26), restructuring plans (Part 26A), CVAs and administrations, usually via the convening order, practice statement letter, explanatory statement, or meeting rules. In Ireland, similar court‑set bar dates are used in schemes and examinerships under the Companies Act 2014. Usage is broadly consistent across these jurisdictions. Key features are: clear notice to affected parties; objectively reasonable deadlines; and consequences for non‑compliance (vote discounted or claim not admitted for voting). Courts and office‑holders may admit late votes/claims where justice requires, but challenges can arise for inadequate notice, unfair prejudice, or material irregularity. Practical significance: drives timely participation, reduces delay, and provides certainty for vote tabulation. Parties should diarise bar dates and promptly apply if late.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Use or lose clause

NEWS
Arbitration update: England & Wales rulings on anti-arbitration injunctions and section 69 appeals, Germany’s draft reforms, ICSID 2023 stats, UNCITRAL conduct codes, arbitrateAD launch, and UK AI regulation response

In this issue: Arbitration in England & Wales International arbitration Investment arbitration treaty Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Other ADR and arbitration-related news The Arbitration Blog New Law Journal Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Arbitration in England & Wales High Court—anti-arbitration suits—use it or lose it? In Tyson v Partner Reinsurance [2023] EWHC 3243 (Comm), the court considered two applications: a stay in favour of arbitration, and an anti‑arbitration injunction. The matter was striking because the parties executed two reinsurance contracts only eight days apart, each addressing the same risk, term and counterparties. The first chose English law as the governing law and featured an exclusive jurisdiction clause for the English courts. The second selected New York law and incorporated a New York arbitration clause. The defendant, Partner Reinsurance, applied for a mandatory stay so the dispute could proceed to arbitration. The claimant, Tyson, asked the court to grant an...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
Sequential contracts and competing clauses: English Commercial Court upholds later New York arbitration, rejects market custom, and emphasises urgency for anti-suit/anti-arbitration injunctions (Tyson v Partner Reinsurance)

Tyson International Company Ltd applicant and Partner Reinsurance Europe SE, [2023] EWHC 3243 (Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment stands out for three main reasons of practical significance. First, it addresses how to resolve clashing jurisdiction clauses within a suite of contracts. Secondly, it examines whether market custom and practice can influence the construction and understanding of a contract. Finally, it surveys the principles to be applied when dealing with anti-arbitration and anti-suit injunctions in this context. Where a single contract contains both an exclusive jurisdiction provision in favour of a court and an arbitration clause provision, English courts have previously read that seemingly pathological pairing as signifying that the designated court has supervisory jurisdiction as the seat of the arbitration, with the merits of the dispute to be determined by the stipulated arbitral process. This decision indicates that, if those inconsistent provisions appear in sequential contracts, entered one after another, the court is more likely to treat the later agreement as governing...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Use or lose clause

PRACTICE NOTES
A-Z glossary of UK corporate restructuring and insolvency: key terms, procedures, enforcement and cross-border issues

This glossary sets out numerous expressions frequently encountered in the restructuring arena. Words appearing in the definitions in bold are explained in other entries in this glossary. For further banking terminology, see the principal Banking & Finance Glossary. Restructuring glossary—A Acceleration: Acceleration means the agent, acting on directions from the majority lenders after an event of default, takes formal action, for example calling for early repayment of the facility. Ad-hoc committee: A temporary creditors’ group (often contrasted with a formal committee) that lacks any entitlement to official recognition. Administration: A process under the IA 1986 in which a financially distressed company is operated by an administrator as a going concern before longer-term outcomes, such as break-up and sale, are pursued. Administrator: An Insolvency Practitioner named by the court, a Qualifying floating charge holder, the directors or the company, to take control and fulfil one of the purposes in IA 1986, Sch B1. Administrative receivership: Arises when a company breaches the terms of...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Comprehensive glossary of UK restructuring and insolvency terms, covering Companies Act schemes, Part 26A plans, IA 1986 processes, and cross‑border concepts including COMI, UNCITRAL and assimilated EU rules.

This glossary sets out numerous expressions regularly encountered in the restructuring & insolvency sphere. Words shown in bold within definitions are themselves explained in other entries in this glossary as well. A Article X The MLIJ contains a single provision named Article X, aimed at jurisdictions that have already implemented the MLCBI, like England, or are weighing its adoption. Article X states: ‘Not withstanding any prior interpretation to the contrary, the relief available under [insert a cross-reference to the legislation of this State enacting Article 21 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency] includes recognition and enforcement of a judgment’ (see Practice Note: UNCITRAL model law on recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments (MLIJ): Article X). Asset-backed security (ABS) A form of security anchored by asset pools, for example loans, leases, and credit card receivables. Assimilated law From 1 January 2024, ‘retained law’ has been retitled ‘assimilated law’. The body of domestic law originally arising from EU obligations, created by the European...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
UK Banking, Finance, Capital Markets, Derivatives and Insolvency Law Glossary including Islamic finance

Banking & Finance glossary A Auditing and Accounting Organisation for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) The foremost Islamic, international, autonomous, independent, not-for-profit corporate body that develops and issues accounting, auditing, governance, ethics and Shari’ah benchmarks and standards for Islamic Financial Institutions (IFIs) and the wider Islamic finance sector. Founded in Bahrain in 1991, it is backed by a number of institutional members across more than 45 countries, including central banks and regulatory authorities, financial institutions, accounting and auditing practices, and legal firms. Its pronouncements are currently applied by leading Islamic financial institutions across the world and have advanced a progressive and gradual harmonisation of global Islamic finance practice. It also delivers professional qualification programmes—notably Certified Islamic Professional Accountant (CIPA), Certified Shari’ah Adviser and Auditor (CSAA), and the corporate compliance programme—in efforts to strengthen the industry’s human capital and governance frameworks. For further details, see Practice Note: Key participants in the Islamic finance industry—Accounting and Auditing Organisation for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI). Acceleration Acceleration is the formal action...

Read More Right Arrow