In June 2020, the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (the “CIGA”) introduced a new procedure to the restructuring toolkit in England & Wales, the Part 26A restructuring plan (the “Plan”, see further detail on CIGA in our article here). The Plan is similar to the well-tested English law scheme of arrangement (the “Scheme”), and the English courts have so far relied on the wealth of Scheme case law to guide them in deciding whether to sanction a Plan.
Arbitral awards benefit from being widely enforceable. This is the case particularly in jurisdictions that are members of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 10 June 1958 (New York Convention). Recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award under the New York Convention is rejected only on narrow grounds (Article V). There is, however, an additional ground for an award to become unenforceable in a specific jurisdiction that is often overlooked: limitation periods.
I had an interesting conversation this week with the Evening Standard, considering the prospect of further company voluntary arrangements, or 'CVAs' on the UK high street as the year progresses.
The vast majority of ‘bricks and mortar’ retailers, as well as hospitality venues, are desperately seeking ways to cut their fixed costs to improve their chances of riding-out the pandemic. Leasehold obligations are often among the most significant of those fixed costs, and the CVA offers a well-tested route to compromise those obligations.
2020: ENGLISH INSOLVENCY LAW REFORM
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (CIGA), which came into force on 26 June 2020, introduced the most significant changes to English insolvency law in a generation. It introduced three permanent changes and implemented temporary measures to support businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
When stakeholders in a bankruptcy disagree as to how assets should be distributed, the result may be intercreditor litigation that is both expensive and time-consuming. Such litigation can seem antithetical to the purpose of the Bankruptcy Code, which encourages stakeholders to approve a consensual restructuring plan. Nevertheless, many creditors conclude they have no other choice but to litigate.
On 29 September 2020, lawyers from Carey Olsen obtained adecision from the Commercial Court in the British Virgin Islands (BVIs), approving the use of third party funding (TPF) by liquidators in a BVI insolvency case.
The UK Government has today announced plans to introduce new legislation which will require mandatory independent scrutiny of 'pre-pack' administration sales, where connected parties, such as the insolvent company's existing directors or shareholders, are involved in the transaction.
Although the Sunbird scheme of arrangement was approved by the relevant creditors, sanction was refused by Mr. Justice Snowdon, who highlighted:
- a ‘paucity of information provided by the company as part of the scheme process’, and
- a failure to engage with creditors ‘whom the directors clearly felt were irrelevant or would be an obstacle to their plans’.
He remarked that the company’s approach 'fell a considerable distance short of what was required for a fair process'.
Despite commentators’ recent focus on the new Part 26A restructuring plan, introduced in late June by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020, the scheme of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 (“scheme”) remains a popular tool for companies to reach a compromise or arrangement with their creditors and/or its members.