Environment, social, and governance (ESG) are factors directors, investors, industries, and governments increasingly focus on when making commercial decisions. This is particularly so given increasing public awareness of such issues following recurrent environmental disasters and international summits such as COP26. Tim Symes and Ryan Hooton review the current regulatory environment in the UK, how it might bite on a company’s insolvency and when directors may find themselves personally liable for their actions.

Chris Corbin and Jeremy King, part owners of the company that owns the famous Wolseley restaurant had their company pushed into administration by its co-owner and major lender, having been in default since 2020, and now owes £38m. Administration might not have come as a surprise to anyone in that case.

However, directors and shareholders will not usually get anything like as much notice of a lender’s intention to appoint administrators and will frequently get none at all, as  Insolvency and Asset Recovery Partner Tim Symes explains here.

With many businesses headed towards a ‘winter of discontent,’ dealing with a combination of the after effects of Covid19 related disruption, supply chain issues, soaring inflation and labour shortages, we are undoubtedly going to see a continued rise in insolvencies over the coming months which will emerge in many different and often unpredictable forms.

What could happen this winter?

Morton as Liquidator of MJ Woodman Electrical Contractors Pty Ltd v Metal Manufacturers Pty Limited [2021] FCAFC 228.

In a resounding judgment delivered last week, the Full Federal Court has confirmed that a statutory set-off under section 533C is not available to a defendant in unfair preference proceedings.

Key Takeaways

The Australian Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd (in liq) v Environment Protection Authority [2021] VSCA 294

The Victorian Court of Appeal’s decision in The Australian Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd (in liq) v Environment Protection Authority [2021] VSCA 294 casts significant doubt on liquidators’ capacity to rely upon section 568 of the Corporations Act to disclaim environmental liabilities, despite the absence of any involvement of the liquidator in the creation of those liabilities.

Alex Jay, Head of Insolvency and Asset Recovery, discusses how companies can protect themselves from rising insolvency risks as businesses begin to emerge from the pandemic and commercial pressure increases.

Insolvency risk can affect businesses and individuals in a number of ways.  Markets can turn rapidly – think for example of the recent spate of energy company failures – and can catch you off guard.

22 October 2021 sees the return of winding-up petitions without heavy restrictions. It marks the first day in 18 months that a creditor could present a winding-up petition without having to consider the financial implications of Covid-19 on the company.

A recent High Court judgment has provided some clarity on issues arising from the Debt Respite Scheme (Breathing Space Moratorium and Mental Health Crisis Moratorium) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020 (“the Regulations 2020”). Partner Alex Jay and Senior Paralegal Aarti Chadda examine the judgment and its interpretation of the Regulations 2020.

In a substantial recent decision arising from the Arrium liquidation[1], the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered the materiality of significant future liabilities in assessing the company’s solvency.

A hotly anticipated decision in the ongoing saga of the Babcock & Brown liquidation was handed down last week, resulting in another win for the liquidator (represented by Johnson Winter & Slattery) and further highlighting the challenges facing liquidators when they are thrust into a quasi-judicial function when assessing proofs of debt.