Fulltext Search

Long awaited insolvency reforms in the UK, plus the government’s COVID-19 proposals on the use of statutory demands – and much more

What’s the latest?

Situation before Brexit

Currently, a UK court’s decision to open insolvency proceedings, and the subsequent proceedings, are automatically recognised under Articles 16 and 17 of the European Insolvency Regulation.

Recognition of insolvency proceedings

After Brexit, it is most likely that the UK will be treated as a non-Member State (unless the UK reaches any special agreement with the EU).

Summary

In April 2017, important changes were effected in connection with German insolvency law and the avoidance of certain antecedent transactions.

Case law had greatly increased the risk of insolvency administrators successfully clawing back assets from creditors of the insolvent entity, which the reforms now address.

Background

For a clawback claim based on intent (Vorsatzanfechtung) to succeed, an insolvency administrator has to prove that:

German insolvency law contains provisions that allow for the challenge of payments/securitisation of certain shareholder loans in insolvency proceedings. The reason for this is that under German insolvency law, a loan repayment claim of a shareholder against ‘his’ corporation is subordinated by law (sec. 39 para. 1 no. 5 German Insolvency Code).

The UK High Court today took a crucial step towards resolving the difficult issue of when administrators must pay rent.

After nearly two years of discussion and consultation, the UK Government has today announced that it will not be seeking to introduce new legislative controls on pre-packs, including a proposed three day notice or "cooling off" period.

The term “pre-pack” typically refers to a sale of all or part of a company’s business which is negotiated prior to the company going into administration and then completed by the administrator shortly after his appointment.

Last week the High Court of England and Wales revoked a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) promoted by retailer Miss Sixty in a damning judgment that called into question the conduct of the practitioners involved. The case of Mourant & Co Trustees Limited v Sixty UK Limited (in administration) [2010] could end so-called guarantee stripping – where the CVA purports to discharge guarantees given by a third party – and provide powerful ammunition to landlords seeking to negotiate future CVAs with tenant companies.

His Honour Judge Purle QC in Re Cornercare Limited [2010] EWHC 393 (CH) has clarified English law on the filing of successive notices of intention to appoint administrators. He has held that there is nothing in the relevant provisions of the Insolvency Act 1986 ("IA 1986") to prevent the filing of successive notices of intention to appoint administrators, where the original notice of intention to appoint an administrator had not been acted upon for good reason.