The latest insolvency figures for May show insolvencies continuing to increase, with construction and retail being among the hardest-hit sectors. Company voluntary liquidations continue to top the table, accounting for 85% of the total 2,552 insolvencies for the last month. Compulsory liquidations are also on the rise, particularly driven by HMRC. Small and micro businesses (with annual sales of less than £1m) account for around 99% of all liquidations, according to PWC.

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.

Introduction:

On 5 October 2022, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgement in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA [2022]. The decision is the first from the Supreme Court to address when, and in what circumstances, company directors owe a duty to consider the interests of the company’s creditors (‘’the creditor duty’’).

Wind the clock back a couple of years to (dare I mention it…) the Covid-19 pandemic, and insolvency practitioners were getting mildly giddy about a new development in the form of a standalone moratorium. Slotting in at the forefront of the Insolvency Act 1986 courtesy of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA), the moratorium was designed to give companies a breathing space to find a solution to their troubles when insolvency was knocking on their door.

Since the introduction of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) and the creation of the new Part 26A restructuring plan procedure, questions have been raised about whether the cost of using such a procedure would restrict its use to larger, better capitalised companies.

There are several costs associated with presenting a creditor's petition for sequestration (bankruptcy) in Scotland. As you would expect there are court dues for presenting the petition, currently at £122, as well as sheriff officer and legal fees.

When a company director fails to carry out their legal responsibilities, they run the risk of being disqualified. This can be a lengthy procedure resulting in a period of disqualification during which it is not permitted to form, promote or manage a company.

The main law governing disqualification is contained in the Company Director Disqualification Act 1986.

Grounds for disqualification as a company director

The adage ‘there is no such thing as a free lunch’ rings true for the 831 company directors disqualified in 2023/24 for abusing the Covid financial support scheme.

Looking into the crystal ball at the start of the year to forecast future trends isn’t possible, but one common theme that we expect will continue to impact upon both directors and officers and insolvency practitioners (IP) is the increasing rise of corporate insolvencies.

Welcome to The Week That Was, a round-up of key events in the construction sector over the last seven days.

What's in a name?

A judge has found that insurers were liable to indemnify an insured despite its insurance policy specifying the incorrect name.

The case relates to 'The George in Rye' pub which was damaged by a fire in July 2019. While the named insured was “George on High Ltd t/a The George in Rye”, a separate company (George on Rye Ltd (GoR)) owned the restaurant and hotel business operating in the property.