In this article, consultant John Greenfield, partner David Jones and associate Steven Balmer, examine innovative mechanisms by which creditors may seek to investigate secure assets held in Guernsey structures. In the second part of the article, the authors look particularly at companies and how the traditional insolvency regimes may be employed in aid of creditors but also at how the use of share security may unlock certain doors.
The issue in this case concerned the failure of a holder of a Qualifying Floating Charge (QFC) to give notice to a prior QFC holder before appointing administrators, therefore potentially calling into question the validity of the administration.
Recognition of UK insolvencies in Europe after Brexit[1] is navigating uncertain waters. Following the completion of Brexit, the UK has left parts of the EU's private international law realm, including the application of Regulation (EC) 1346/2000 on Insolvency proceedings (the EU Insolvency Regulation). Therefore, since January this year, any reciprocal statutory cooperation in insolvency law matters between the UK and the EU has ceased.
This legal guide summarises the scope of directors’ duties when a British Virgin Islands company encounters financial difficulties.
Introduction
This legal guide should be read in conjunction with the legal guide entitled “Duties of a director under British Virgin Islands Law” which describes in further detail the duties which British Virgin Islands law imposes on a director generally.
While it had been clear for most of the recent economic downturn that the 24% of Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKSE) listed companies incorporated in Bermuda may have recourse to the court in their place of incorporation to secure an adjournment or stay of an actual or anticipated winding up petition in Hong Kong, it is now equally clear that Cayman incorporated companies (which represent another 50% of the HKSE) will have similar access to restructuring assistance.
The facts of this case were somewhat unusual although it serves as a reminder of the principles involved in the trading of a business by a trustee in bankruptcy.
Background
This briefing note provides an overview of some of the commercial reasons for and the technical legal requirements of a company wishing to acquire its own shares (also referred to as “share buy-backs”).
JMW Solicitors have recently obtained an Order made pursuant to Section 234 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “Act”), which includes a term that allows the office-holder to recover possession of a residential property, without the need for separate possession proceedings being issued pursuant to Part 55 of the Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”), which sets out the usual Court procedure for obtaining an order for possession of land.
The background facts to this case are relatively straightforward: a group of companies consisting of the parent (‘AIL’) and three subsidiaries (‘the Subsidiaries’) operated in the energy sector.
A lender (‘Junior Creditor’) advanced approximately £39M to AIL, secured by qualifying floating charges (‘QFC’) over AIL and the Subsidiaries. A second lender (‘Senior Creditor’) subsequently lent £5M to AIL secured by a QFC over AIL but not the Subsidiaries.
Twelve creditors (representing about 16% of company debt, and represented by a firm of licensed insolvency practitioners) have failed in an attempt to compel administrators to move to creditors’ voluntary liquidation, alternatively an order for compulsory liquidation. The Creditors also sought the revocation of a proposal ‘purported to have been deemed approved’.
The Company was involved in construction work, falling victim to the Covid-19 pandemic in that it was forced to cease trading following the announcement of lockdown on 23 March 2020.