The recent Accountant in Bankruptcy v Peter A Davies case examines how a family home is dealt with following sequestration of an individual. The sheriff's comments about the case suggest there could be room for improvement in the Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 1985, to make the process clearer for everyone involved.

Case background

On April 12, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts entered judgment in favor of a national bank, determining that the plaintiff failed to, among other things, “carry his burden to prove that he incurred injury” concerning economic or emotional distress damages as a result of the original lender’s violations.

Last year, temporary changes to the bankruptcy process were brought in by the Scottish Government, to help individuals financially impacted by the pandemic. Scottish ministers have now introduced the Bankruptcy (Miscellaneous amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2021, to make some of those changes permanent.

The main purpose of these measures is to improve access to minimal asset process bankruptcy ( "MAP" a form of bankruptcy typically aimed at people with low income and few assets) and to reduce the cost for debtors seeking bankruptcy more widely.

On April 6, the Small Business Administration (SBA) updated its Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) frequently asked questions to clarify when an applicant or owner is no longer considered to be “presently involved in any bankruptcy” for PPP loan eligibility purposes.

On 26 March 2021, amendment to the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (Coronavirus) (Suspension of Liability for Wrongful Trading and Extension of the Relevant Period) Regulations 2020 (the Regulations) will come into force.

The purpose of the Regulations is to extend some of the temporary measures introduced by The Corporate Insolvency & Governance Act 2020 (CIGA), to assist companies that are struggling to deal with the ongoing economic ramifications of pandemic-related restrictions.

These Regulations apply across the UK, including Scotland.

The majority of the building and engineering contracts that we encounter (and draft) require some form of performance security from the contractor, whether this is a parent company performance guarantee granted by the contractor's ultimate holding company, or a performance bond granted by a third party surety or a bank for a capped sum. Indeed most, if not all, standard form contracts provide for these forms of security, even if only as an option.

CVAs remain the restructuring tool of choice for businesses with multi-let properties. Since the start of the first UK lockdown, there has been a marked increase in the number of CVAs in the hospitality and retail sectors. Whilst vaccines are now being dispensed, the economic ramifications of the pandemic will persist for some time to come and as a result we expect to see many more CVAs being proposed, particularly in these sectors. The introduction of R3's Standard Form COVID-19 CVA Proposal could lead to an increase in the use of CVAs in the SME market too.

Businesses and individuals increasingly own assets in multiple jurisdictions. As an insolvency practitioner (or office holder), the chances of being appointed over an estate with assets located outside the UK are greater now than they ever have been.

Significant changes will come into force after 31 December if no agreement is reached (or is not finalised and ratified) before the end of the transition period for cross-border insolvency proceedings. Importantly, the changes will alter the grounds for jurisdiction to open insolvency proceedings in the UK and impact the recognition of those UK insolvency proceedings in the EU.

On November 25, the U.S. Court of Appeals vacated summary judgment in favor of defendants in an action alleging the defendants violated the FDCPA by attempting to collect a debt that was discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding and no longer owed.