Few, if any words can do justice to the impact COVID-19 has had on life in the UK over recent months. Legal practitioners’ use of the word “unprecedented” during this period is, well… unprecedented but even it doesn’t begin to describe the effect the pandemic has had on businesses across the country. There isn’t an industry or profession that hasn’t been touched by the effects of the pandemic and the legal sector is no different.
Traditionally, Midsummer’s Day marks a time for festivities and optimism. But, as 24th June approaches, commercial landlords and tenants are unlikely to enjoy such sanguinity.
This article was first published by CoStar News on 5 June 2020 and can be seen here.
It is unresolved whether a creditor can rely upon a section 553C set-off under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to reduce an unfair preference claim. Until the controversy is resolved by a binding court decision, liquidators and creditors will continue to adopt opposing positions.
In his judgment handed down on 7 May 2020 in the case of Gregory v ARG (Mansfield) Ltd [2020] EWHC 1133 (Ch), HH Judge Davis-White QC, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, commented (on an obiter basis) that where a company regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”) seeks to enter administration, section 362A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (“FSMA 2000”) and paragraph 29 of Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “Insolvency Act”), require that writ
On 20 May 2020, the Corporate Insolvency & Governance Bill 2019-2021 was introduced to Parliament. With the Bill slated to be fast-tracked into law, here are some of the key insolvency aspects to be aware of.
Why now?
A company in liquidation served a creditor’s statutory demand for debt where there was a genuine dispute about the existence of the alleged debt. The statutory demand was set aside by the Court and the liquidators were ordered to personally pay costs on an indemnity basis.
What happened
In SJG Developments Pty Limited v NT Two Nominees Pty Limited (in liquidation) [2020] QSC 104:
Hot off the press, yesterday we learnt a great deal more about the proposed suspension of the UK’s wrongful trading laws with the publication of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill 2019-21.
As directors consider how to meet their duties during the COVID-19 pandemic, the safe harbour provisions may provide some protection from insolvent trading liability.
Introduction
Although the contentious background to the applications to restrain the presentation of two winding up petitions heard together in (but only listed singularly as) the case of Shorts Gardens LLB v London Borough of Camden Council [2020] EWHC 1001 (Ch) is somewhat unusual, these cases nonetheless raise some interesting points of principle which may be used by the courts in determining whether it is appropriate to restrain or dismiss a winding up petition due to COVID-19.
The extraordinary disruption to UK business caused by the COVID-19 lockdown has spawned much discussion about changes to existing insolvency laws to help businesses which are struggling to survive in this abnormal environment. One topic of discussion has been the so-called ‘light touch’ administration. Here we provide a quick overview of what this involves.
What do we mean by a ‘light touch’ administration?