What changes for companies, directors and creditors?

Directive (EU) 2026/799 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 March 2026 (the Directive”) was published on 1 April 2026. It establishes a framework for the minimum harmonisation of certain substantive aspects of insolvency law in Member States. The Directive is also relevant to the European Economic Area.

The statutory restructuring plan mechanism, introduced by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020, introduced a flexible, court-sanctioned tool to rescue financially distressed businesses. The take-up in England and Wales has been widespread, with several well-known names having plans approved. However, despite being available since summer 2020, Scottish restructuring plans remain remarkably rare.

Licensing has been a focus topic in our team lately and for good reason. If you’re a residential builder or a specialist trade in NSW, then no ticket, no play.

While the facts of the decision in Leto v Secretary Department of Customer Service [2026]NSWCATOD 26 (Leto v Secretary) are obviously very specific, an insolvency in an applicant’s trading history is frequently a barrier to licensing and is frequently an inducement to do whatever is necessary to avoid insolvency, so as to retain a licence or the future prospect of one.

In Re Esken Limited (Overseas Company Number FC041629) [2026] EWHC 495 (Ch) (the “Judgment”), the High Court addressed a question with significant practical implications: can a company incorporated overseas but operating primarily in the UK move from administration into a creditors' voluntary liquidation (“CVL”)?

Many individuals believe that simply having accumulated debt is enough for a court to accept an insolvency application, but the legal reality is quite different. The UAE Insolvency Law for natural persons provides genuine protection for the debtor; however, in return, it imposes strict formal and substantive requirements.

The Court of Appeal’s recent judgment in TAQA Bratani Limited [2025] EWCA Civ 1669 (“TAQA”) has reshaped the risk landscape for directors operating within corporate group structures, particularly complex ones.

In Fletcher & MacPherson v Desai the High Court considered whether section 375 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (“IA 1986”) could be used to revisit the consequences of a successful transaction at an undervalue claim and, in particular, whether it could operate to preserve or confer secured status on a creditor after bankruptcy.

专栏“担保面面观”开篇语

《民法典》的重要改革理念之一是功能主义担保观，并据此将所有权保留、融资租赁、保理等非典型担保作为“其他具有担保功能的合同”统一纳入担保体系。在规则新设统合之下，实务操作中的权利实现路径、混合担保中的顺位问题、与既有法律制度的衔接等难题亦随之浮现。鉴于此，笔者发起“担保面面观”专栏，旨在立足立法本意，结合实务案例，系统梳理担保领域的规范逻辑与适用要点，为市场主体理解规则、防控风险提供实务镜鉴。

引 言

《民法典》及《最高人民法院关于适用<中华人民共和国民法典>有关担保制度的解释》（以下简称《担保制度解释》）已基本确立了所有权保留的担保权构造，由此衍生的进一步问题是，如何与混合担保、合同解除、执行、破产等制度衔接适用，这已成为当前实务界的热点争议。其中部分问题系我国立法混合继受所导致的特有问题，在比较法上并无成例可借鉴。鉴于此，笔者将结合新法修订与最新司法判例，围绕六大争议、十二个子项问题展开，以期抛砖引玉，求教方家。