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.

Almost a year has now passed since the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) first entered force on 26 June 2020. According to the Explanatory Notes that accompanied CIGA, “the overarching objective of [the Act] is to provide businesses with the flexibility and breathing space they need to continue trading during this difficult time”. To this end, CIGA introduces a number of permanent and temporary amendments to the UK’s insolvency landscape which are aimed at ensuring businesses can maximise their chances of survival against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

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