On 22 June 2012, Almunia, Vice President of the European Commission responsible for Competition Policy gave a speech on competition policy in times of restructuring. He considered the challenges that the EU has been facing over the past weeks and months and how these challenges are shaped by the urgent need for economic restructuring and growth in Europe, the rapid globalisation of economic activity, and the fast evolving technological environment.

The court will unravel a transaction where it appears to have been entered into to place assets beyond the reach of creditors.

This was the case in Ambrose sub nom Garwood v Amborse & Ambrose, where the trustee in bankruptcy of Mr Ambrose applied for declaratory relief and an order for the possession and sale of Mr & Mrs Ambrose's property.

On 11 May 2012, the Commission announced that it has approved a 2009 restructuring plan for ING, following a General Court judgment which had partially annulled the Commission’s previous clearance decision. Therefore, the Commission has essentially confirmed its earlier decision and has decided to appeal the General Court judgment. It has also opened an in-depth State aid investigation into the subsequent amendments to the restructuring plan made by the Dutch State and ING. The Commission believes that the complexity of the issues justifies an in-depth analysis.

On 21 March 2012, following an in-depth investigation, the European Commission announced that it has approved the UK government’s plans to relieve the Royal Mail of excessive pension costs and to provide restructuring aid consisting of a debt reduction of £1,089 million. Read more.

In Rhinegold Publishing Ltd v Apex Business Development Ltd, Rhinegold and another company owed debts to the defendant in the sums of approximately £22,000 and £31,000 respectively. The defendant presented a winding-up petition against both companies which resulted in settlement being reached. The settlement provided that the companies would pay off the debts owed in full by monthly payments and that no proceedings would be issued in relation to the debts referred to in the original statutory demand if payment was made.

Where there is no evidence of lack of authority in placing orders which have not been paid, the court refused to allow an injunction to restrain a winding-up petition.

In the matter of A company (2012) (the company), a creditor had issued a statutory demand against it in relation to invoices for advertising placed with it by the company's sales and marketing manager (M) that were unpaid. The company argued that those orders had been placed without its authority and M admitted that she had exceeded her authority in so placing them.

 Valuation evidence

The court has reaffirmed that comparable sales evidence is the best evidence when determining the retrospective valuation of a property.

The case of White v Davenham Trust Ltd, has reaffirmed that a creditor can choose its own method of enforcing a debt which has been guaranteed even where it might hold security for that debt.

The court has a limited discretion not to make a bankruptcy order where the debt is the subject of a statutory demand which has not been paid and is outstanding at the time of the bankruptcy petition hearing.

In circumstances where a debtor lacks mental capacity to deal with a statutory demand and subsequent bankruptcy petition, the court will rescind or annul a bankruptcy order.