TG Jones High Street Limited has secured High Court approval for two inter-conditional restructuring plans, but Mr Justice Hildyard’s reasons place a clear warning around the use of Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 to impose losses on dissenting creditors. The plans for TG Jones High Street Limited and TG Jones Retail Holdings Limited were sanctioned on 1 July 2026 under case references CR-2026-002241 and CR-2026-002874, preserving a business operating 451 stores while it seeks to avoid insolvent administration.
The decision was reached only after the court paused to examine what Hildyard J described as plans of exceptional urgency, complexity and reach. The final versions were notified to creditors on 23 June, one day before the first of 16 class meetings and a week after the deadline set by the convening order. Slaughter and May LLP, instructing Tom Smith KC, Ryan Perkins and Jon Colclough for the plan companies, nevertheless persuaded the court that the late changes disadvantaged Modella Capital Limited rather than plan creditors.
The bigger concern involved cross-class cram-down. Only the least adversely affected landlord class approved the plans by the required majority, while other landlord classes faced imposed lease modifications and non-core suppliers were offered 50% of their debts across 36 monthly instalments. British Land plc and other landlords, represented by Benjamin Shaw KC and instructed by Hogan Lovells LLP, had challenged the proposals before reaching a settlement that improved creditor terms, including a profit-sharing entitlement and the removal of licence fees during the rent-concession period.
Hildyard J accepted that administration would produce lower returns and described the plans as the lesser of two evils. Even so, his judgment records concern about Modella retaining its equity, the reduction of a post-restructuring valuation to between nil and £3 million after an acquisition price of up to £42 million, and the “high level of execution risk” surrounding the turnaround. St Albans City and District Council, through David Adams, also objected to the effect on ratepayers and the public purse.
The ruling gives restructuring solicitors, barristers and in-house counsel a demanding template for future landlord plans. Urgency will not remove the need for timely disclosure, coherent valuation evidence and a defensible allocation of benefits between creditor classes. Law-firm management teams handling distressed mandates should also expect courts to examine whether compressed timetables are genuinely unavoidable or have been created by the plan companies themselves. TG Jones obtained sanction, but the reasons show that Part 26A remains an exceptional jurisdiction whose commercial convenience must be supported by evidence capable of surviving anxious judicial scrutiny.
More from Lawyer Monthly – Law Society Legal Ombudsman Costs Warning – Lawyer Monthly