The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented economic disruption, creating sudden financial distress across industries. Companies are now facing impacts ranging from a dramatic decline in revenue of uncertain duration, to potential setbacks to M&A transactions, to delayed or canceled financing rounds.

With even some previously well-performing companies potentially entering the so-called zone of insolvency, it’s important to review the fiduciary duties owed by directors and officers and how discharging those duties may change in the face of financial distress.

With coronavirus causing unprecedented distress to the whole global economy, all types of business in every sector will be affected. These are not normal times, and it is clear that all businesses will need to formulate coherent action plans to survive. The Government appears to be working on emergency plans to provide help to trade and industry that has already been badly affected by underlying economic uncertainties. More high-street names have closed their doors this week.

It concerns me when I meet with a director of a failing company and he or she simply doesn’t know the various insolvency procedures should their company get into financial difficulties.

In the Matter of System Building Services Group Limited (In Liquidation) [2020] EWHC 54 (Ch), the court confirmed that a director’s fiduciary duties continued after the appointment of an administrator or liquidator and that the subsequent purchase from the administrator/liquidator of a property at an undervalue was in breach of those duties. As a result, the property was declared to be held by the director on a constructive trust for the company.

The famous and respected Beales department store chain has entered into administration, an insolvency procedure provided under the Insolvency Act.

It is always depressing when any company fails and is forced to enter into administration, let alone a prestigious business such as Beales with its 139-year-old history. The ripples of such an insolvency not only impact upon its 1300 employees, but it is also painfully felt amongst its suppliers, landlords and of course the greater community.

Retail, as a sector, has long been under pressure from increased competition from online retailers, which has resulted in reduced footfall on the high street, affecting many companies, including many well-known names.

Between 2016 and 2019, 13 of 23 company voluntary arrangements (CVAs), which are used by UK businesses to reduce their debts, saw their group going into administration, while other companies that did not agree a CVA ended up seeking investors to buy the business.

What is a CVA?

It is extremely sad to hear the news that Katie Price has been declared bankrupt.

Although the stigma of bankruptcy may have disappeared, it is still an extremely sobering event when an individual fails financially and is declared bankrupt by a court. In an increasingly materialistic world, bankruptcy is an ever-common event in society.

Each year amendments are made to the rules that govern how bankruptcy cases are managed — the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. The amendments address issues identified by an Advisory Committee made up of federal judges, bankruptcy attorneys, and others. The rule amendments are ultimately adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court and technically subject to Congressional disapproval.

Only A Few Rule Amendments This Year. Unlike previous years, there are only four rule amendments expected to take effect on December 1, 2019. Here they are:

Recently, the British Chamber of Commerce (BCC) warned that economic conditions are weakening and businesses are struggling, following a survey they have conducted of 6,600 companies employing 1.2 million workers. Their research found that domestic and export sales are falling, and services firms have seen a decrease in work in the three months to September. This has prompted fears that the UK’s economy may fall into recession.

A Big Answer To A Big Question. After dividing the courts for a number of years, we finally have the answer to the big question of whether rejection of a trademark license by a debtor-licensor deprives the licensee of the right to use the trademark. Here’s the question on which the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v Tempnology, LLC case: