In a recent decision, the Court of Appeal upheld a High Court finding, which granted a declaration under section 819 of the Companies Act 2014 (CA 2014), restricting the appellant director (Appellant) from acting as a director or secretary of a company for a period of five years, unless the company meets the requirements set out in subsection (3) of section 819.

Under Irish and UK law, company directors owe fiduciary duties to act in good faith in the interests of the company. The company's interests in this context usually means the collective best interests of the members. However, UK and Irish authorities have developed directors' common law duties, such that in cases of insolvency, directors have a duty to consider the interests of the company's creditors.

The Supreme Court handed down its long-awaited judgment in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA on 5 October 2022. This important case addresses the duties of directors to consider the interests of creditors as a company approaches insolvency.

While the judgment will be welcomed by many as providing some useful guidance on a number of issues, there still remain some key areas of uncertainty which, as we consider in further detail below, will present clear challenges for directors seeking to navigate their way through a company’s financial difficulties.

In a William Fry article published earlier this year, we discussed the Irish government's approval to opt-in to a regulation amending Annexes A and B to the European Insolvency Regulation 2015/848 (EIR Recast) regarding the recognition of insolvency processes recently introduced in other EU Member States.

The corporate insolvency statistics for Q2 2022 paint a worrying picture for UK businesses. With inflation at a 40-year high, fuelled by soaring gas and electricity bills, food prices and wage increases, the cost of living crisis is taking hold across the economy.

On 22 July 2022, judgment was handed down in relation to the sanction of the first Part 26A restructuring plan to be proposed by a small–medium enterprise (SME) in Re Houst Limited [2022] EWHC 1941 (Ch). The restructuring plan (RP) procedure set out in Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) has been widely considered to be out of the reach of SMEs due to excessive cost. The decision is also an interesting one for other reasons, notably the cram-down of HMRC as a dissenting creditor.

We recently discussed the establishment of the Corporate Enforcement Authority (CEA) with effect from 7 July 2022, and the commencement of the Companies (Corporate Enforcement Authority) Act 2021 (CEA Act). With the commencement of the CEA Act, some insolvency-related amendments to the Companies Act 2014 (CA 2014) are now in force.

Today’s insolvency statistics contained few surprises, creditors’ voluntary liquidations (CVLs) have continued to outnumber other types of company insolvencies by some margin and have distorted the overall picture, which is that (putting aside CVLs where directors/shareholders elect to pull the plug themselves on a company’s survival) figures for other types of company insolvencies remain below pre-pandemic figures.

For those who missed it the Insolvency Service published an excellent research report at the end of June which focuses on the treatment of landlords in company voluntary arrangements (CVAs). This was against the backdrop of a large number of "landlord" CVAs in recent years – particularly in the retail and casual dining sectors – where landlords have often complained that they have been unfairly treated compared to other compromised creditors. The report concludes that landlords are, broadly speaking, equitably treated compared to other classes of unsecured creditors.

The Insolvency Service has published an interim report which evaluates three permanent changes to the insolvency regime as introduced by The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA): restructuring plans; the standalone moratorium and the restriction on contractual termination rights (so-called ipso facto clauses). The takeaway messages are as follows: