The government has published draft regulations designed to tighten up how administration sales to connected parties will work. The hope is that this will increase creditor confidence and improve transparency in the process.
So, what are pre-pack administrations, what is wrong with them, and what is the government going to do about it?
What are pre-pack administrations?
A pre-pack administration is simply a ‘teed up’ sale of a company’s business and assets before it enters administration, which is completed immediately after administration.
New regulations deriving from the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 have extended the effective prohibition on statutory demands and winding up petitions until 31 December 2020. Tim Symes, a partner in our Insolvency and Commercial Litigation teams, looks at the implications of this for debtors and creditors.
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 came into force on 26 June 2020 introducing a number of temporary and more permanent reforms, summarised in my colleague Jess’ post here.
Following the recent Supreme Court decision in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd, it is clear that companies in liquidation have the right to adjudicate a dispute. However, a successful adjudication is only half the battle: the insolvent company must still persuade the court to enforce the decision.
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act came into force on 26 June 2020 introducing a number of reforms aimed at providing protection to companies in financial distress, particularly as a result of the COVID19 pandemic.
However, the reforms present a number of potential problems to suppliers. Specifically, a permanent provision has been added to the Insolvency Act 1986 which:
The Court of Appeal has handed down judgment in a case concerning the Core VCT PLC companies (In Members Voluntary Liquidation) [2020] EWCA Civ 1207. The case concerns an order made to restore three dissolved companies after they went through a solvent liquidation process (ie no creditors still owed money), putting them back into solvent liquidation and appointing liquidators to investigate not only the affairs of the company but also the conduct of the ex-liquidators. The restoration application was made without notice to the ex-liquidators or members.
Since Richard Branson’s Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd’s request for Government loan was denied (see the post by my colleague, Jess), the airline has announced plans for a private-only solvent recapitalisation to "rebuild its balance sheet" and "welcome passengers back".
It is an unfortunate reality that the number of insolvencies in the construction sector seems certain to rise in coming months as the economic impact of COVID-19 takes effect. In this context, the recent Supreme Court decision in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd [2020] UKSC 25 is particularly relevant.
This case concerned important questions regarding the compatibility of two statutory regimes:
The government’s temporary changes to the insolvency rules to cater for Covid-19 – in particular the new restrictions on the presentation of winding-up petitions – have been well-publicised. These have now been packaged within an Act (the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (“CIGA”)) which also brought in significant, permanent changes to UK insolvency law.
One of the most powerful tools for insolvency practitioners when investigating the affairs of an insolvent company where wrongdoing is suspected is section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (“IA 1986”). This confers power on English courts to order certain categories of parties to produce documents and an account of dealings relating to companies being wound up in the UK.