[2007] EWHC 1002 (Ch) 1 May 2007. Concerned whether a company voluntary arrangement was effective to release a parent company from liability in respect of guarantees provided by it to landlords of premises let to its subsidiary. The subsidiary, with financial support from its parent company, had acquired a number of high street stores and superstores. The landlords had taken parent company guarantees or indemnities from the parent company in respect of the subsidiary 's obligations under the leases. The subsidiary had got into financial difficulties and wished to close a number of stores and to enter into a CVA under which those who were creditors in respect of the premises to be closed would receive 28p in the £ funded by the parent company, while the rights and obligations of other creditors would be unaffected. The landlords challenged the CVA as unfairly prejudicial under the Insolvency Act 1986 s.6 and sought declarations that it was invalid or ineffective in so far as it purported to affect the rights of the landlords. "Held": Each creditor was a party to the arrangement by virtue of being, and in the capacity of, a creditor of the company. It was the company, and not any third party, which had the benefit of, and could enforce the rights and obligations conferred by the CVA. The hypothetical agreement resulting from approval of a CVA was not therefore one between creditors as to rights and obligations between themselves in a capacity other than as creditors of the company.