From 1 December 2020 onwards, HMRC will be treated as a preferential creditor of companies for certain taxes including PAYE, VAT, employee NICs and Construction Industry Scheme deductions. In the event that a company enters administration or liquidation, HMRC's claim for these taxes will rank ahead of any floating charge holder.
This reflects recent changes made to the Finance Act 2020.
The impact on floating charge holders
On 13 January 2021, the English High Court sanctioned three interconditional Part 26A restructuring plans for the subsidiaries of DeepOcean Group Holding BV.
The plans for two of the companies were approved by the required 75% majority. While the third plan received 100% approval by secured creditors, only 64.6% of unsecured creditors voted in favour.
Consequently, at the sanction hearing the court was required to consider whether the cross-class cram down mechanism in the restructuring plan should be engaged for the first time in the UK.
On 11 February 2021, the English High Court confirmed in gategroup Guarantee Limited that restructuring plans are insolvency proceedings so are not covered by the Lugano Convention.
One of the debt instruments subject to the gategroup restructuring plan contains an exclusive Swiss court jurisdiction clause. Under the Lugano Convention, proceedings relating to "civil and commercial matters" must generally be brought in the jurisdiction benefitting from the exclusive jurisdiction clause.
In Uralkali v Rowley and another [2020] EWHC 3442 (Ch) – a UK High Court case relating to the administration of a Formula 1 racing team – an unsuccessful bidder for the company's business and assets sued the administrators, arguing that the bid process had been negligently misrepresented and conducted.
The court found that the administrators did not owe a duty of care to the disappointed bidder. It rejected the claimant's criticisms of the company’s sale process and determined that the administrators had conducted it "fairly and properly" and were not, in fact, negligent.
In Uralkali v Rowley and another [2020] EWHC 3442 (Ch) – a UK High Court case relating to the administration of a Formula 1 racing team – an unsuccessful bidder for the company's business and assets sued the administrators, arguing that the bid process had been negligently misrepresented and conducted.
The court found that the administrators did not owe a duty of care to the disappointed bidder. It rejected the claimant's criticisms of the company’s sale process and determined that the administrators had conducted it "fairly and properly" and were not, in fact, negligent.
In brief
As of 19 October 2020, the changes to the Bankruptcy Code of Ukraine became effective.
What’s new
From 17 October 2020, and for the quarantine period, the following changes are introduced in the bankruptcy procedure:
In brief
As of 19 October 2020, the changes to the Bankruptcy Code of Ukraine became effective.
What’s new
From 17 October 2020, and for the quarantine period, the following changes are introduced in the bankruptcy procedure:
The Code
On 21 October 2019 the Bankruptcy Code of Ukraine shall come into legal force ("Code"). The rules on operation of the electronic trade system within bankruptcy proceedings shall become effective earlier, on 21 July 2019.
The Code amends the bankruptcy procedure of legal entities and introduces the bankruptcy procedure for individuals (which was not previously applicable in Ukraine).
New Provisions
The most significant changes are the following:
On 19 January 2013, a new edition of the Law of Ukraine "On rehabilitation of debtor or its bankruptcy" (the “Bankruptcy Law”) came into force. The Bankruptcy Law provides for the possibility of a pre-bankruptcy rehabilitation of a debtor which may be introduced by the court on the debtor’s or the creditor’s request. During the pre-bankruptcy rehabilitation of the debtor bankruptcy proceedings cannot be commenced in court, and the court may establish a moratorium on the satisfaction of the creditors’ claims.