Fulltext Search

There are changes to the Act mainly designed to bring in the required changes following the abolition of physical meetings in the first instance.

Approval is now by a creditors decision making procedure namely -

  1. Correspondence;
  2. Electronic Voting; or
  3. Virtual Meeting.

Contents of the Proposal

Any proposal must comply with the general principles set out in rule 8.2I IR2016 -

Budniok v Adjudicator, Insolvency Service [2017] EWHC 368 (Ch)

Chief Registrar Baister overturned the Adjudicator's decision in refusing to grant a Bankruptcy Order where the Debtor's COMI was an issue.

Mr Budniok, a German citizen who had recently moved to London, applied online for a Bankruptcy Order in England. After several requests for further information, the Adjudicator was not satisfied Mr Budniok's centre of main interests ("COMI") was in England and as such refused the application. Mr Budniok appealed.

Creditors' Bankruptcy Petition

The rules for these petitions are contained in 10.6 to 10.33. This section also covers IVA supervisors making a petition. The good news is that under the new Rules, there are very few changes to the current procedure.

As well as the new Insolvency Rules coming into force on 6 April, there are over 100 amendments to the Insolvency Act that will come into force as well. These amendments are provisions from the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 ("SBEEA") and the Deregulation Act 2015 ("DA"), and are designed to facilitate and run alongside the new Rules.

Applications to Set Aside a Statutory Demand

Set Aside Applications were previously governed by rules 6.4 and 6.5. They are now governed by Rules 10.4 and 10.5.

Rule 10.4 - Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand

In summary, Rule 10.4 provides that a debtor may, after having been served with a Statutory Demand, make an application to court to have it set aside.

The English Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal that a claim could be pursued in the English courts whilst the defendant was also subject to winding-up proceedings under Icelandic insolvency law.

This case concerns a Court of Appeal hearing following the collapse of the large Icelandic bank, Kaupthing Bank HF ("Kaupthing"), in 2008. Kaupthing was subject to a moratorium order made by the Icelandic courts in 2008 and a winding-up order in November 2010.

Registrar Baister overturned the adjudicator's decision in refusing to grant a Bankruptcy Order where the debtors COMI was an issue.

Mr Budniok, a German citizen who had recently moved to London, applied online for a Bankruptcy Order in England. After several requests for further information, the adjudicator was not satisfied Mr Budniok's centre of main interests ("COMI") was in England and as such refused the application. Mr Budniok appealed.

Changes to the Insolvency Act 1986 ("Act")

SBEEA 2015 makes a host of supplemental amendments to the Act, the general effect of which is remove references to creditors' meetings and replace them with the alternative decision processes.

As a consequence:

Europe has been a hot bed of legislative reform in the R&I space since the GFC. This panel discussed where some of the key jurisdictions had ended up in this process, in some cases, making significant changes to allow greater flexibility of treatment and efficiencies of process. Led by Philip Hertz (Clifford Chance), Lucas Kortmann (RESOR), Angel Martin (KPMG) and Dr Leo Plank (Kirkland & Ellis) discussed processes available in the UK, the Netherlands, Spain and Germany and some impending changes.

The consideration of the issues relating to TOPOIL begins in one of the three breakout sessions. This one considers whether some sort of restructuring process is appropriate and if so which might be the top options and their relative merits.