Introduction

Today, the UK Supreme Court considered for the first time the existence, content and engagement of the so-called “creditor duty”: the alleged duty of a company’s directors to consider, or to act in accordance with, the interests of the company’s creditors when the company becomes insolvent, or when it approaches, or is at real risk of, insolvency.

The High Court in London gave judgment on Friday, 3 July 2020 on the relative ranking of over $10 billion of subordinated liabilities in the administrations of two entities in the Lehman Brothers group.

The recent decisions in Re MF Global UK Ltd and Re Omni Trustees Ltd give conflicting views as to whether section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 has extra-territorial effect. In this article, we look at the reasoning in the two judgments and discuss a possible further argument for extra-territorial effect.

The conflicting rulings on section 236

Tax treatment in the hands of the creditor

The waiver of debt results in the accounting ‘loss’ of a receivable. Such loss, however, is not automatically tax deductible in the hands of the creditor.

The deductibility of such loss may be prohibited, either because it is deemed not to be incurred to retain or increase taxable income (‘general deduction criterion’), or because it is deemed to be an ‘abnormal or benevolent advantage’ granted to the debtor (‘anti-abuse rule’).