Under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), office-holders are given wide powers but they are subject to the control of the court. In order to allow insolvency practitioners to carry out their duties efficiently and without having constantly to look over their shoulders, this control has always been exercised with a light touch. In recent years there have been several important cases examining these issues.[1]

After the tumult of the past few years, with emergency legislation being introduced to mitigate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, the last few months have felt relatively quiet in terms of new legislation. That said, there have been a number of important government publications in relation to the insolvency industry, and it appears that change is on the horizon.

Our precedent contribution contained introductory remarks on the reform of insolvency law, which came into force on 1 September 2023. As indicated, this contribution focuses on a key element of this reform.

The revision of the insolvency landscape has not spared the concept of the transfer of business, which is one of its pillars.

The transfer of a business can take place at two stages: as part of a public judicial reorganisation proceeding, but also as part of a silent preparation prior to bankruptcy.

Notre contribution précédente comprenait les propos introductifs portant sur la réforme du droit de l’insolvabilité, entrée en vigueur ce 1er septembre 2023. Comme indiqué, la présente contribution porte sur un élément clé de cette réforme.

La révision du paysage de l’insolvabilité n’a pas épargné le concept du transfert d’entreprise, qui en constitue l’un des piliers.

Le transfert de l'entreprise peut intervenir à deux stades : dans le cadre d’une procédure de réorganisation judiciaire publique, mais également dans le cadre d’une préparation silencieuse à la faillite.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: Upon an application for an administration order the court exercised its discretion and concluded that a winding up order was more appropriate. The court was satisfied that the Respondent company was insolvent but could not see why administration would fulfil one of the statutory purposes.

Re Aartee Steel Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1701 (Ch)

What are the practical implications of this case?

Op 20 juni 2019 heeft het Europees Parlement voor het eerst een nieuwe richtlijn aangenomen die het insolventierecht op Europees niveau harmoniseert.

Het was lang wachten tot het proces van omzetting in Belgisch recht eindelijk werd afgerond met de goedkeuring van een wetsontwerp in mei 2023 en de publicatie van de wet op 7 juni 2023.

De wet, waarvan efficiëntie het sleutelwoord is, zal op 1 september 2023 in werking treden.

Dit is een belangrijke stap in de richting van de modernisering van de insolventiewetgeving.

Le 20 juin 2019, le Parlement Européen a adopté une nouvelle directive qui harmonise pour la première fois le droit de l’insolvabilité au niveau européen.

L’attente fut longue avant que le processus de transposition en droit belge n’aboutisse enfin par l’adoption d’un projet de loi en mai 2023, et par la publication de la loi le 7 juin 2023.

La loi, dont le maître mot sera l’efficacité, entrera en vigueur le 1^er septembre 2023.

On June, 20 2019, the European Parliament adopted a new directive harmonising insolvency law at a European level for the first time.

It was a long wait before the process of transposition into Belgian law finally came to fruition with the adoption in May 2023, and the publication of the law on June, 7 2023.

The law, whose guiding principle is “efficiency”, will come into force on September, 1 2023.

Dispute Resolution analysis: In a case where a bankruptcy was annulled on the basis that the alleged tax liability was ill-founded and misconceived, HMRC has been ordered to bear the OR’s and the trustees’ costs of the bankruptcy.

Re Adjei [2023] EWHC 1553 (Ch)

What are the practical implications of this case?

Dispute Resolution analysis: Following a liability trial, an unfair prejudice petition under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 has been dismissed. None of the alleged instances of unfair prejudice directed against the Respondents was made out.

Pickering v Hughes and ors [2022] EWHC 3359 (Ch)

What are the practical implications of this case?