This article provides snapshot of some of the more incidental goings-on of which we believe practitioners should be aware. Amongst other things, it covers developments in the reform of the EC Regulation, the consultation on the new-look SIP 16, and the Comet decision on the extent of the court’s S.236 powers.
EU Council adopts agreement on EC Insolvency Regulation reforms
First in the lineup, the Council of the EU agreed a compromise agreement with the EU Parliament on the proposed amendments to the EC Insolvency Regulation (Reg EC 1346/2000).
Paragraph 71 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act allows an administrator to apply to court to sell assets subject to a fixed charge as if they were not subject to the security. The case of O’Connell v Rollings and others [2014] EWCA Civ 639 is a rare illustration of such an application and provides useful guidance on the factors the court will take into account.
The background
We have become used to a regular stream of decisions in which the courts are prepared to grant administration or winding up orders in respect of overseas companies which have COMI or an establishment in the UK. The decision inRe Buccament Bay Limited and another [2014] EWCH 3130 is a rare exception in which the court has refused to exercise its discretion.
The background
The recent unreported decision of the Bristol District Registry of the High Court in Blue Monkey Gaming Limited v Hudson & Others [2-14] All ER (D) 222 provides useful guidance for insolvency practitioners on the extent of their duties in respect of identification and preservation of ROT stock.
What was the case about?
The practice of energy companies in insolvency situations has long been a cause for frustration: in most cases the supplier will terminate the existing supply contract and a new - deemed - statutory contract at much higher rates will then apply.
Dealing a major blow to the trustee’s efforts to recover fraudulent transfers on behalf of the bankruptcy estate of the company run by Bernard Madoff, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York held in SIPC v. Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC1 that the Bankruptcy Code cannot be used to recover fraudulent transfers of funds that occur entirely outside the United States.
This update considers the recent High Court decision in Thomasand Another v Edmondson (12/05.2014) concerning the court’s ability to make an income payment order against a bankrupt who is already subject to an income payment agreement.
The background
This update focusses on Teresa Graham’s recent review on pre-pack administration published by the Government which sets out areas for improvement and provides detailed recommendations to help better the procedure.
The background
Preamble
The COMI rules prevent a foreign based company from accessing the UK insolvency regimes, unless it has a sufficient connection with the UK. However, in Christophorus 3 Limited the High Court approved the ‘flipping up’ of a specially created UK newco in a German group to enter administration.
The background
The High Court described this case as ‘an elaborate scheme for the restructuring and refinancing’ of a German group.
This update focusses on the recent Supreme Court decision in Re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) concerning the application of the “contributory rule” in administration and the admissibility and set-off of contingent claims in administration
Lehmans and the contributory rule