Introduction
Editor, Jonathan Spearing
Welcome to the ninth edition of Commodities in Focus (CIF); our bulletin for clients engaged in the production, trading, carriage, storage and financing of commodities.
The COVID-19 pandemic together with Brexit have meant many commercial relationships have had to stop or risk having to do so in the future. Are you ready to deal with what happens if any of your key contracts terminate?
No contract is 100% ‘Brexit-proof’. The current uncertainty about whether there will or won’t be a trade deal with the EU makes it unclear what contracts will be profitable and which won’t in 2021. For many businesses, some of their contractual relationships may well become untenable in the period after 11pm on 31 December 2020.
Recent months have brought unprecedented challenges to businesses, with no sector immune to the economic repercussions of the pandemic. Yet despite headline news of certain high-profile restructurings and insolvencies, such as Virgin Atlantic, Debenhams, and Edinburgh Woollen Mill, it seems the emergency measures implemented by the UK Government have, to a degree, staved off wide spread economic collapse that may otherwise have been inevitable.
New legislation has come into effect which extends the applicability of certain temporary provisions under the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (“CIGA”). But what does this mean for businesses?
In several ways, businesses can continue to make use of the breathing space provisions brought in by CIGA to support their day-to-day work in keeping their companies afloat during the pandemic.
This note considers how the recent changes to UK insolvency law introduced by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 ("CIGA") might affect those involved in the sale and purchase of commodities. In particular, it looks at the impact of Section 14 of CIGA on contracts for the supply of goods or services, and on the typical rights and remedies of the seller / supplier under such contracts.
In the latest edition of Going concerns, Stephenson Harwood's Asia restructuring and insolvency team touch on key changes in Singapore brought about by the recent Singapore Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 (and where applicable, the impact on the shipping industry), and the positions in Singapore and Hong Kong on winding up petitions vs arbitration clauses.
Content
Get to know the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 ("IRDA") Winding up petitions vs arbitration clauses (SG) The prima facie standard of review prevails
The Judge in the Sunbird scheme of arrangement sanction hearing has declined to sanction the scheme due to the “paucity of information” provided by the company to the creditors ahead of the creditor vote.
The Judge criticised the company’s general approach to the way in which it engaged with creditors, particularly those whom the directors felt would be obstructive to the scheme’s progress. In general terms, the Judge commented on the practice of lock-up agreements and highlighted concerns with the payment of lock-up fees.
Background
The Finance Act 2020 received Royal Assent on 22 July 2020 and will restore HMRC as a preferential creditor on insolvency (Crown Preference) with effect from 1 December 2020.
There had been speculation that the Government would shelve or at least postpone the reintroduction of Crown Preference in the wake of Covid-19. In fact, even before the pandemic, the proposals had been widely criticised by the restructuring and insolvency industry as harmful to the UK’s corporate rescue culture.
Jonathon Crook of Shoosmiths discusses the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Industrial Strategy v PAG Asset Preservation Limited in which the Court of Appeal dismissed a public interest challenge to a scheme for the mitigation of business rates on empty property and where he acted for the successful companies.
Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Limited v Arjowiggins HKK 2 Limited CACV 158/2017 (date of judgment 5 August 2020)1
Introduction