The U.K. Financial Services and Markets Act 2023
The U.K. government has published its much-anticipated proposals for regulating the cryptoasset industry. These proposals, currently in the form of a consultation, will see many (but not all) cryptoasset-related activities being brought within the regulatory perimeter for financial services in the U.K.
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance (CIG) Act 2020, which was enacted on 25 June 2020, introduces a number of permanent changes to the insolvency and restructuring framework in the United Kingdom, some of which have specific ramifications for the aviation sector. Crucially, the moratorium provisions in the CIG Act do not displace the protections afforded to creditors who have registered their interests under the Cape Town Convention.
Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act: Key Features
Three key features of the CIG Act 2020 are:
The UK Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill, currently progressing through UK Parliament, will have an impact on various stakeholders in the aviation industry once enacted, due to its moratorium, supply contract, and restructuring plan provisions.
Key Features
The UK Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill has three key features:
The UK government on 20 May set out its hotly anticipated Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill, which, once enacted, will bring into force previously announced insolvency reforms.
We summarise below the main provisions of the bill as it currently stands. Please look out for further LawFlashes on this legislation as it develops over the next few weeks.
Moratorium
A number of UK insolvency trade association bodies and professionals are advocating for the use of what is known as a light-touch administration for companies in financial distress as a result of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.
Light Touch Administration – What Is It?
This week’s TGIF takes a look at the recent case of Mills Oakley (a partnership) v Asset HQ Australia Pty Ltd [2019] VSC 98, where the Supreme Court of Victoria found the statutory presumption of insolvency did not arise as there had not been effective service of a statutory demand due to a typographical error in the postal address.
What happened?
This week’s TGIF examines a decision of the Victorian Supreme Court which found that several proofs had been wrongly admitted or rejected, and had correct decisions been made, the company would not have been put into liquidation.
BACKGROUND
This week’s TGIF considers Re Broens Pty Limited (in liq) [2018] NSWSC 1747, in which a liquidator was held to be justified in making distributions to creditors in spite of several claims by employees for long service leave entitlements.
What happened?
On 19 December 2016, voluntary administrators were appointed to Broens Pty Limited (the Company). The Company supplied machinery & services to manufacturers in aerospace, rail, defence and mining industries.
This week’s TGIF considers the recent case of Vanguard v Modena [2018] FCA 1461, where the Court ordered a non-party director to pay indemnity costs due to his conduct in opposing winding-up proceedings against his company.
Background
Vanguard served a statutory demand on Modena on 27 September 2017 seeking payment of outstanding “commitment fees” totalling $138,000 which Modena was obliged, but had failed, to repay.