The landscape relating to winding-up petitions has changed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Hundreds of petitions have been adjourned already, and the new Temporary Insolvency Practice Direction has now adjourned all hearings due to take place before 21 April across the country. It also sets out new procedures and timings for the listing and re-listing of petitions, with many hearings in London and the regions moving to hearings by video-conference for the foreseeable future.

The Government has put in place substantial measures that are intended to help mitigate the devastating effect of Covid-19 on the UK economy. Many businesses are now facing their toughest test in living memory. Yet even as the UK endures extraordinary lockdown measures, and with some 3.9 billion people in global isolation, directors of UK companies must continue to try and keep their businesses out of insolvency.

Insolvency intersected with the UK government’s response to the coronavirus pandemic in an application to the High Court by the administrators of restaurant chain Carluccio’s. Considering the government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (the “Scheme”), the court held that:

On Easter Monday, 13 April 2020, the High Court (Snowden J presiding) handed down its judgment in the matter of Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch). To add to the Easter joy, the furlough guidance was amended on 9 April 2020 and the judgment had to embrace the amended guidance. One of the clarifying amendments on 9 April was the confirmation that employees who transfer under TUPE after 28 February 2020 may be placed, or continue, on furlough. This has practical implications in the light of this judgment. 2.

Lawyers have called for a break on winding-up petitions against retailers as they fail to pay creditors due to the outbreak. So far, retailers have been hit with 52 winding-up petitions since the beginning of the year, with the numbers accelerating since the coronavirus outbreak took hold, according to lawyers at RPC.

Such a move would give retailers breathing space as they try to mitigate the impact of coronavirus, but it would also hurt creditors including small suppliers.

Download this guide for commercial landlords from our property and insolvency team. This handy table sets out the enforcement options potentially available following the government’s emergency measures to combat COVID-19 whether or not the defaulting tenant has entered a formal UK insolvency procedure.

Landlord’s remedies on default by an insolvent commercial tenant

The High Court has delivered the first decision on the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (the “Scheme”), in the context of the Carluccio’s administration.

As we have previously discussed (HERE), despite further clarification from HMRC over recent days, there remain some unanswered questions regarding the detailed operation of the Scheme, given that the Scheme’s exact legal framework has not been published.

CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE – INTRODUCING FLEXIBILITY TO DIRECTORS' DUTIES?

IN LIGHT OF COVID-19, THE UK GOVERNMENT RECENTLY ANNOUNCED ITS INTENTION TO TEMPORARILY SUSPEND THE OFFENCE OF WRONGFUL TRADING BY DIRECTORS OF UK COMPANIES. THIS WILL INEVITABLY HAVE A WIDE-RANGING EFFECT ON BOTH DIRECTORS AND CREDITORS.

The government has introduced a number of measures in order to assist businesses during the current Covid-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, for some businesses, this may not be enough to prevent their business entering some form of insolvency. Businesses and directors need to beware of the pitfalls that they could fall into, as they continue to trade. Two of the most common are Preference Payments and Transfers at Undervalue, both of which are discussed below.

Preference Payments

The Carluccio’s judgment provides some much-needed clarity on the interrelation of the Furlough Scheme and the requirements of insolvency legislation. It is to be commended for its clarity and for the fact that it had to construe the workings of the Furlough Scheme in the absence of any statutory guidance as to its implementation. It is to be hoped that, when the Government comes to enact the necessary legislative measures (including perhaps amendments to Schedule B1 and IR 2016), that it does so with this judgment very firmly in mind.