Whilst AI is leading the agenda when it comes to the future of technology, fintech still remains the ace in the pack for investors. In fact, fintech businesses contribute more than £10 billion to the UK economy every year – supporting 76,000 jobs.
Fintechs also tend to outperform firms in other sectors too, with an annualised growth rate of 16% over the past decade, against 1.3% for the average SME.
There has been much commentary recently on the treatment by lenders of individuals and small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Indeed, the FCA has made its expectations very clear – that lenders should fully support those experiencing financial difficulty.
As a restructuring professional and insolvency practitioner, and a former regulator, I have some competing views and thoughts on what this means and whether it is the optimum approach in the longer term.
In 1907, Robert Baden-Powell, an English soldier, devised the Scout motto: Be Prepared. Upon hearing the Scout motto, someone asked Baden-Powell the inevitable follow-up question.
“Prepared for what?”
“Why, for any old thing,” he replied.
In Scouting for Boys (published in 1908), Baden-Powell wrote that to ‘Be Prepared’ means “you are always in a state of readiness in mind and body to do your duty.” More than a century later, preparedness is still a cornerstone of Scouting.
Celebrated WWII leader, General George Patton, once said “Do not try to make circumstances fit your plans. Make plans that fit the circumstances.” Unfortunately, it’s advice that is not being fully heeded, according to the FCA’s latest thematic review on wind-down planning The FCA has concluded that “significant further work” is needed to ensure wind-down plans are credible and operable, and has urged all firms to ensure adequate procedures and resources (both financial and non-financial) are in place.
With two decisions (No. 1895/2018 and No. 1896/2018), both filed on 25 January 2018, the Court of Cassation reached opposite conclusions in the two different situations
The case
The Constitutional Court (6 December 2017) confirmed that Art. 147, para. 5, of the Italian Bankruptcy Law does not violate the Constitution as long as it is interpreted in a broad sense
The case
With the decision No. 1195 of 18 January 2018, the Court of Cassation ruled on the powers of the extraordinary commissioner to require performance of pending contracts and on the treatment of the relevant claims of the suppliers
The case
The Court of Cassation with a decision of 25 September 2017, No. 22274 confirms that Art. 74 of the Italian Bankruptcy Law provides a special rule, which does not apply to cases to which it is not explicitly extended
The case
With the decision No. 1649 of 19 September 2017 the Court of Appeals of Catania followed the interpretation according to which a spin-off is not subject to the avoiding powers of a bankruptcy receiver
The case