The High Court decided that the rights of the two landlord objectors were capable of being compromised by the further restructuring plans. This was not a private dispute turning on the construction of a contractual agreement, and instead the dispute had to be considered within the context of the wider sanction proceedings for the restructuring plans.

Additionally, it held that in this context the objectors were not being placed in any worse position than the other landlords whose leases had been placed in the same restructuring category. The courts were required to treat the creditors on an equal footing (the “pari passu” principle) unless there was a good reason for treating the objecting landlords differently.

The High Court did not consider that the undertakings provided this justification, and certainly treating the objectors differently would not assist the proposed restructuring. It refused to grant the injunctions.