Insolvency termination clauses in Supply Contracts

What are the potential implications of the new measures in relation to contracts for the supply of goods or services set out in the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (the “Act”) for aircraft lenders, lessors and airlines? In the second of a series of three articles, we consider the new prohibition on suppliers invoking termination clauses (or changing other terms) upon an insolvency or formal restructuring process introduced in the Act.

On 31 March 2020, the Czech government approved ‘Lex COVID-19’, a new act (and an amendment of the Insolvency Act and Enforcement Code) that should help mitigate certain effects caused by the COVID-19 epidemic, especially in relation to different proceedings (e.g. civil, administrative, criminal, insolvency and enforcement) and the corporate lives of legal entities.

Lex COVID-19 will now be debated in the Chamber of Deputies ahead of final approval.

A recent High Court decision considered the duty of Law of Property Act (LPA) receivers when selling secured property to an associated company of the creditor. The LPA receivers were chartered surveyors, appointed by the creditor in respect of a cider factory over which it had security and were alleged to have acted in bad faith by preferring the interests of the creditor over the interests of the debtor company.

According to S&P Global fixed income research, EUR 3.7 trillion of rated European company debt is due to mature between mid-2017 and the end of 2022.This gives rise to anticipation that, in the coming years, the European financial markets will be increasingly driven by refinancing, restructuring and investment in distressed assets. Respondents to the survey “Changing tides: European M&A Outlook 2017” prepared by CMS in cooperation with Mergermarket in September 2017 have also remarked on this trend.

The Court of Session has confirmed that the administration in Scotland of a Scottish company will take priority over an Indian liquidation of the same company, regardless of where the company’s business and assets are situated. The Court has also confirmed that the validity and enforceability outside the UK of a floating charge is irrelevant to the validity of an administrator’s appointment in Scotland under that floating charge.

Summary

On 14 October 2015, the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that two payments had been made in breach of a freezing order. The order prohibited the respondent to the freezing injunction application from dealing with or disposing of any of its assets other than in the ordinary and proper course of business. The Court held that the judge at first instance had taken too narrow a view in construing this exception and that, in light of the specific facts of the case, the freezing order had not been breached.

Since changes were made to the Bankruptcy Act 1985 (the “Bankruptcy Act”) in 2008 it has been possible for sheriffs to continue sequestration petitions for up to a maximum of 42 days.  This was a change from the previous position whereby sequestration petitions could only be dealt with by the grant of the award or dismissal, and was brought in in recognition of the common practice adopted by many sheriffs.

The Romanian government has adopted, by means of Government emergency ordinance no. 91, the Insolvency Code. The Code gathers and amends all pre-insolvency and insolvency provisions in Romanian legislation relating to companies, groups of companies, credit institutions, insurance and reinsurance companies, as well as cross-border insolvency proceedings. It will enter into force on October 25, 2013 and will also apply to already ongoing insolvency proceedings.

Es war eine immer häufi gere Praxis der Gläubiger, grundlose Insolvenzanträge zu stellen, um einen Konkurrenten vom Konkurrenzkampf zu eliminieren. Auf diese reagiert die Novelle des Insolvenzgesetzes, die am 1. November 2012 in Kraft trat.

In a recent case, the court held that a party to a settlement agreement (in this case a broker) cannot restrict the indemnity it is providing so that the indemnity is not payable if the insured goes into administration, or liquidation, or undergoes some other insolvency event. The decision is important on its own facts. But it does also raise questions about the legitimacy of other clauses in insurance contracts which depend on whether or not the insured or reinsured has entered into any kind of insolvency event.