In brief

The Rating (Coronavirus) and Directors Disqualification (Dissolved Companies) Act ("Act") received royal assent on 15 December 2021.

The Act extends the scope of powers available to the Insolvency Service to address the issue of directors dissolving companies to avoid paying their liabilities.

On 15 November 2021, the English Court released its reasoned judgment for the sanction of Amicus Finance Plc's (Amicus) restructuring plan.

Background

Amicus, a short term property lender, entered administration in 2018. The administrators proposed a restructuring plan to compromise creditors' claims, exit the administration and ultimately restore the company as a going concern. The company faced imminent liquidation if the plan was not approved. Secured creditor, Crowdstacker, an online peer-to-peer lending platform, opposed the plan.

The High Court recently decided that a prosecution could be brought against an administrator under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act (TULRCA) in R (on the application of Palmer) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court [2021] EWHC 3013.

An important decision for employers and administrators has been handed down by the High Court in the case of R (Palmer, Forsey) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court [2021] EWHC 3013. The Judgment acts as a stark reminder to employers and company personnel about the criminal liability they can face for failing to notify the Secretary of State of proposed collective redundancies as well as confirming that that an administrator can be prosecuted personally.

Background

End of CIGA restrictions

On 1 October 2021 the temporary changes to corporate insolvency law, brought about by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) and which seriously curtailed creditors’ ability to present winding-up petitions between 1 March 2020 and 30 September 2021, changed.

Insolvency related claims in relation to contracts subject to arbitration agreements continue to result in interesting challenges for the English court. In a recent decision the court had to decide whether an application for a summary judgment amounted to a step in the proceedings such that the applicant had waived its right to seek a stay in favour of arbitration.

Background

We discussed the announcement that Bulb Energy Ltd (“Bulb”) was due to be placed into special administration in our previous blog outlining how the rules for energy supply companies work, the supplier of last resort (“SoLR”) regime and what energy supply company special administration entails.

Introduction

The Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) has been one of the most talked about debated, evolving legislations of recent times. It has brought with itself, a sea change in the manner that debt is resolved in India. From its very advent in late 2016, IBC has been embroiled in long fought interpretational tussles which have resulted in various gaps being filled in by the Supreme Court of India. In fact, the legislation itself has undergone several and frequent amendments.

In the context of debt recovery litigation, the obtaining of a decree (judgment) should not be an end in itself and this is particularly true in relation to volume debt recovery litigation. The purpose of a court decree is to enable the creditor obtain payment from his debtor of the sums of principal, interest and expenses (legal costs) due in terms of the decree.

BITE SIZE KNOW HOW FROM THE ENGLISH COURTS 

Appeals