Almost a year has now passed since the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) first entered force on 26 June 2020. According to the Explanatory Notes that accompanied CIGA, “the overarching objective of [the Act] is to provide businesses with the flexibility and breathing space they need to continue trading during this difficult time”. To this end, CIGA introduces a number of permanent and temporary amendments to the UK’s insolvency landscape which are aimed at ensuring businesses can maximise their chances of survival against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

As the UK slowly emerges from the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government has announced the further extension of the duration of certain temporary measures initially introduced pursuant to the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA).

The appointment of joint liquidators can be a useful tool in cross-border insolvency proceedings, particularly when assets are located in a number of jurisdictions. However, courts must ensure that a joint liquidator appointment does not lead to conflicting duties based on the respective laws in each jurisdiction. This was the main issue for consideration in West Bromwich Commercial Ltd v Hatfield Property Ltd, where Jack J was satisfied that the appointment of joint liquidators was necessary.

A recent decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council reaffirms its position that only in rare cases will it be appropriate to interfere with concurrent findings of fact of two lower tribunals.¹ The Privy Council found Byers and others v Chen Ningning to be one such case on the basis that an error in findings of fact as to the Respondent’s status as a director had been made by the first instance trial judge and upheld by the Court of Appeal.

Introduction

On 24 February 2021, the government published new draft Administration (Restrictions on Disposal etc. to Connected Persons) Regulations 2021 (the Regulations), following the consultation process conducted in late 2020. The Regulations are still to be debated by Parliament, but are expected to come into effect on 30 April 2021 with few substantive amendments.

With the fallout from the pandemic hitting many businesses, those considering insolvency should look at the broad gamut of options on offer to avoid winding up the company. Matthew Padian, managing associate, explains.

After a somewhat leisurely start, case law regarding the new restructuring plan in Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006 now seems to be picking up pace.

A recent decision of the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal has confirmed that, whilst the courts of the British Virgin Islands (BVI) will recognise the appointment of foreign representatives (including liquidators and trustees in bankruptcy) as having status in the BVI in accordance with his or her appointment by a foreign court, they may only provide assistance to representatives from certain designated countries.

In Uralkali v Rowley and another [2020] EWHC 3442 (Ch), the High Court has confirmed the position in relation to the duties that officeholders owe to third parties involved in the sale process of a business and assets out of an insolvent estate.

On 13 January 2020, the High Court sanctioned the restructuring plans proposed by three UK companies in the DeepOcean group, under Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006.