<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Irrevocable joint development rights prevented land exclusion from CIRP, requiring status quo pending appellate disposal.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104639</link>
    <description>Unilateral cancellation of an irrevocable joint development agreement and power of attorney was treated prima facie as ineffective where they conferred development rights on the corporate debtor and barred unilateral revocation. The construction period ran from requisite approvals and had been extended, while an alleged no-objection remained conditional and unaccepted. Land subject to mortgage and possible third-party rights was not excluded from the corporate insolvency resolution process at this stage. The landowner could intervene, and all parties were required to maintain status quo pending disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:30:53 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:30:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Irrevocable joint development rights prevented land exclusion from CIRP, requiring status quo pending appellate disposal.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104639</link>
      <description>Unilateral cancellation of an irrevocable joint development agreement and power of attorney was treated prima facie as ineffective where they conferred development rights on the corporate debtor and barred unilateral revocation. The construction period ran from requisite approvals and had been extended, while an alleged no-objection remained conditional and unaccepted. Land subject to mortgage and possible third-party rights was not excluded from the corporate insolvency resolution process at this stage. The landowner could intervene, and all parties were required to maintain status quo pending disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:30:53 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104639</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>