It is widely anticipated that the next twelve months could be a challenging period for many businesses in the UK and that there could be a significant rise in the number of companies in financial distress.

Where this is the case, the directors of those companies will need to be increasingly mindful of the duties they have to the company's creditors, as well as to its shareholders.

Looking at the most recent figures on corporate insolvencies makes for worrying reading for landlords and occupiers alike, with overall numbers now exceeding pre-pandemic levels. Overall, corporate insolvencies increased by 17% in England and Wales since February 2022 and were a third higher than in February 2020.

Matthew Czyzyk, Natalie Blanc, Natalie Raine and Emily Ma, Ropes & Gray

This is an extract from the 2023 edition of GRR's Europe, Middle East and Africa Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

Tradition Financial Services Ltd v Bilta (UK) Ltd and others [2023] EWCA Civ 112

Key Takeaways:

Can a liquidator run an unjust enrichment claim to seek to recover PAYE and NIC liabilities from a company’s directors arising from the company’s use of a “disguised remuneration” employee benefit trust (“EBT”) scheme? Based on the findings of ICC Judge Barber in the case of Re Ethos Solutions Ltd, the answer is “no”.

EBTs: Background

News of HSBC's acquisition of Silicon Valley Bank UK (SVB UK) has brought huge relief to the UK tech community and wider economy – quite possibly the optimal result in the circumstances following the Bank of England's announcement of a likely insolvency procedure on Friday 10 March.

Concern amongst sports aficionados around the financial integrity of the sports industry was raised in late 2022 when rugby union was the latest sport to be dragged into the insolvency conversation. Both Wasps RFC (Wasps) and Worcester RFC (Worcester, and together with Wasps, the Clubs), who can each trace their history back to the mid-19th century, appointed administrators after facing financial difficulties they attributed to the Covid-19 pandemic and resulting lockdowns.

Where a commercial property is sold by a receiver or insolvency practitioner (IP), VAT must be charged on the sale if the owner had exercised and properly notified an option to tax (OTT) in respect of the property. The IP acting on behalf of the seller needs to establish whether an OTT has been made and notified so that VAT is charged , if needed.  This can be difficult if company records are in disarray, directors of the insolvent company are non-cooperative and/or the IP or receiver has limited knowledge of the property and company.

Following the sanctioning of the Good Box restructuring plan (RP) it seems the answer is yes. This might sound surprising to those familiar with schemes of arrangement, because that outcome is at odds with the long-standing decision in Re Savoy Hotels.

For those less familiar with schemes and scheme case law, the court declined to sanction the Savoy scheme because the company did not approve it, consequently the judge found that the court had no jurisdiction to sanction it.

Nicola Sharp considers the recent appeal decision in Tradition Financial Services Ltd vBilta (UK) Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ, and the ways in which it affects the definition of fraudulent trading.