An interim government report has concluded that the restructuring plan, the standalone moratorium, and the restriction on contractual termination (ipso facto) measures introduced by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) satisfy their policy objectives. The report is part of the statutory review which must be carried out within three years of the measures coming into force.
The Court of Appeal in Hunt v Ubhi has confirmed that insolvency practitioners seeking freezing orders are subject to the default requirement of providing an unlimited cross-undertaking in damages.
Bankruptcy courts possess broad discretion to dismiss chapter 11 bankruptcy cases for “cause” under Section 1112(b) of the Bankruptcy Code. While the Bankruptcy Code enumerates a long (though non-exhaustive) list of instances when a case may clearly be dismissed for cause, courts generally agree that cases may also be dismissed under Section 1112(b) for the classic catch-all reason—if they are filed in “bad faith.”
The government’s Insolvency Service published its Post Implementation Review of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) on 27 June 2023. The overall conclusion from the data collected, including a survey of insolvency practitioners, is that the permanent CIGA measures have been broadly welcomed by stakeholders and are seen as a positive addition to the UK’s rescue framework.
The economic clouds continue to darken alongside the incessant rainstorms outside, and people are paying closer attention to the forecasts to understand what to do to keep dry.
As interest rates continue to rise, and many commentators describe a challenging economic outlook amid an extending inflationary cycle, one only has to look at the recent company collapses in the construction sector to see the struggle that businesses are facing. Times are, and certainly will be, tough for a large number of people, and there are clearly sectors in distress.
In Denaxe Limited v Cooper & Rubin, the Court of Appeal has recently considered the important issue of immunity from suit against a party who has previously sought the Court’s approval for a particular course of action. This is commonly utilised by trustees (under CPR 64) and insolvency practitioners (for example under CPR 69 and Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986) when faced with difficult questions concerning entitlements and distributions to different classes of beneficiary or creditor.
Most landlords seek advice prior to entering a commercial lease.
But, as the cautionary tales in this article suggest, if the tenant goes into administration or liquidation, landlords would be wise to seek specialist advice. The lesson is simple: a landlord should not lightly assume that the appointment of an administrator or liquidator implies the end of the lease or a right to re-enter the premises.
Amendments to the Malaysian Insolvency Act 1967 were passed by the Dewan Rakyat on 24 May 2023.
A few key points arising from the amendments are:
1. Sub-section 33B (2A) was amended to include 2 new categories where bankrupt individuals may be able to qualify for a discharge from bankruptcy and the creditor(s) may not object:
A “pre-pack” is a sale of all or part of a distressed company’s business or assets, negotiated before the company enters a formal insolvency process and executed by the appointed insolvency practitioner immediately after the insolvency process begins.
Revival of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (‘CIRP’) proceedings refers to the restoration of the already withdrawn CIRP by a creditor which generally happens upon the breach of the settlement agreement (‘Settlement Agreement’) pursuant to which the application for CIRP also gets withdrawn. In such circumstances, rather than filing for a fresh application for initiation of CIRP, the creditor may seek reviving of the earlier application.