The rapidly changing impact of COVID-19 on companies and the wider economy presents directors with the unenviable task of balancing the immediate need to secure the survival of their company against the longer-term implications for their stakeholders. In March, the UK Government announced that wrongful trading measures would be temporarily suspended to ease this pressure. The suspension measures are included in the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill, which introduces both temporary measures, such as this, and permanent and significant changes to UK insolvency law.

As the name suggests, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency 1997 (Model Law) seeks to address complexities caused where insolvencies cross borders, while leaving substantive insolvency laws of each country largely unaltered. However, as jurisdictions continue to adopt and interpret the Model Law, inconsistencies in its application are coming to light.

Navigating the road between regulatory compliance and business rescue

When dealing with a goods vehicle operator in an insolvency context:

Corporate reorganizations often involve waivers of inter-company debt. In general – although perhaps more obviously outside the group context – the waiver of a debt can be seen as producing a profit for the debtor company. Where this is reflected in profit and loss for accounting purposes, a taxable profit may arise in the hands of a UK resident debtor. Typically, however, debt waivers in the context of corporate reorganizations are not problematic.

In September a draft bill was published for public consultation, pursuant to which a district court may be asked to confirm a restructuring plan between a company and its creditors and shareholders concerning the rescheduling and restructuring of debts to prevent bankruptcy. Confirmation from the district court results in the restructuring plan not only binding the creditors and shareholders involved, but also creditors and/or shareholders that have not voted in favour of the composition.

European Union

The German Parliament passed an act to reduce the risk of clawback actions and provide more legal certainty in this regard under German law, the so called "Act for the Improvement of Legal Certainty concerning Clawback pursuant to the German Insolvency Code and the Creditor's Avoidance of Transfers Act" (Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechtssicherheit bei Anfechtungen nach der Insolvenzordnung und dem Anfechtungsgesetz) on Thursday, 16 February 2017.

The aim of a payment action is to recover monies due. Obtaining a positive judgment from the court is just the first step in that process. The party with the benefit of the judgment still needs to enforce the order if payment is not made. This guide describes what enforcement means in practice and the approach to enforcement in Scotland.

Getting started

To enforce a court decree in Scotland, creditors need to do the following:

On 16 November 2015, Italy implemented the European Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (“BRRD”)1 through the publication in the Italian Official Gazette of the Legislative Decrees no. 180 and no. 181 (the “Decrees” and, respectively, the “Decree 180” and “Decree 181”).

How much stress can we expect to see for oil and gas producers and related companies as a result of the current low prices? And what special issues does this industry face when it’s time to restructure or file for bankruptcy?*

Declining oil prices