Fulltext Search

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.

Temporary suspension of obligation to file for insolvency and of creditor’s right to request opening of insolvency proceedings

On 25 March 2020 the German parliament passed a bill “to mitigate the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in civil, bankruptcy and criminal procedure law” (COVID-19 Bill) that aims at protecting companies that experience financial difficulties as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Vorübergehende Aussetzung der Insolvenzantragspflicht und des Rechts des Gläubigers, die Eröffnung eines Insolvenzverfahrens zu beantragen

Am 25. März 2020 hat der Deutsche Bundestag ein Gesetz „zur Abmilderung der Folgen der COVID-19-Pandemie im Zivil-, Insolvenz- und Strafverfahrensrecht (COVID-19 Insolvenzgesetz) beschlossen, das darauf abzielt, Unternehmen zu schützen, die infolge der COVID-19-Pandemie in finanzielle Schwierigkeiten geraten.

As the Novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread across the globe, people and businesses are facing unprecedented challenges, both immediate and strategic. Governments in various jurisdictions have announced various measures to try to alleviate the distress caused by the numerous issues that have arisen and continue to arise, particularly around cashflow and employees.

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