Chase Cambria
  • Log in
  • Not a member yet?
go
  • Contact
  • Webmail
  • Archive
 
  • Home
  • Overview
  • Journal Issues
  • Subscriptions
  • Editorial Board
  • Author Guidelines

International Corporate Rescue

Journal Issues

  • Vol 1 (2004)
  • Vol 2 (2005)
  • Vol 3 (2006)
  • Vol 4 (2007)
  • Vol 5 (2008)
  • Vol 6 (2009)
  • Vol 7 (2010)
  • Vol 8 (2011)
  • Vol 9 (2012)
  • Vol 10 (2013)
  • Vol 11 (2014)
  • Vol 12 (2015)
  • Vol 13 (2016)
  • Vol 14 (2017)
  • Vol 15 (2018)
  • Vol 16 (2019)
  • Vol 17 (2020)
  •         Issue 1
  •         Issue 2
  •         Issue 3
  •         Issue 4
  •         Issue 5
  •         Issue 6
  • Vol 18 (2021)
  • Vol 19 (2022)
  • Vol 20 (2023)
  • Vol 21 (2024)
  • Vol 22 (2025)

Vol 17 (2020) - Issue 3

Article preview

Re Debenhams Retail Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 600

Frank Clarke, Associate, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP, London, UK

Synopsis

In Re Debenhams Retail Limited, the Court of Appeal has held that by accessing the UK Government's Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (the 'JRS') and paying employees that had been placed on furlough, administrators will have clearly adopted the relevant contracts of employment for the purposes of paragraph 99 of schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986.
The decision upholds the judgment of Trower J in the High Court ([2020] EWHC 921 (Ch)), which also followed the decision of Snowden J in Re Carluccio's Limited [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch).
The Court ruled that an administrator's intentions (even objectively determined) are not relevant to the question of 'adoption'. The question is whether the administrator has taken active steps to continue the employment of the relevant employee. Accessing the JRS and paying furloughed employees is sufficient for the contracts of employment to be adopted by the administrators, even if no other actions are taken by the administrators in relation to the furloughed employees.
The Court of Appeal's decision provides important clarity on this area of the law and will be of clear relevance to administrators appointed while the JRS is in operation.
The Court accepted that there may be good reasons of policy for excluding action restricted to implementation of the JRS from the scope of 'adoption', however, such exclusion cannot be accommodated under the law as it stands.

Buy this article
Get instant access to this article for only EUR 55 / USD 60 / GBP 45
Buy this issue
Get instant access to this issue for only EUR 175 / USD 230 / GBP 155
Buy annual subscription
Subscribe to the journal and recieve a hardcopy for
EUR 730 / USD 890 / GBP 560
If you are already a subscriber
log In here

International Corporate Rescue

"ICR keeps you up-to-date with the most important need-to-know information to support your daily work. Recommended for everyone who wants to stay informed about the most important topics reflected in the title: International Corporate Rescue."

Prof. Em. Bob Wessels, University of Leiden

 

 

Copyright 2006 Chase Cambria Company (Publishing) Limited. All rights reserved.