Introduction

After a turbulent year in British politics, the UK is now clearly charting a momentous course out of the European Union.

Leaving the European Union is likely to have far-reaching implications, particularly for International Banks who have traditionally used London as a gateway for accessing financial services markets in the rest of Europe. What will happen to single market access in the long term remains to be seen.

In the case of Wilson v McNamara [2020] EWHC 98 (Ch) the High Court of England and Wales (the Court) considered whether the EU principle of freedom of establishment requires that a pension held in another EU member state (Ireland) should be excluded from a bankruptcy estate under UK law in the same manner as a UK pension would be in a UK bankruptcy. Mr Justice Nugee decided in order to decide the case the Court needed to refer a preliminary reference to the European Court of Justice (CJEU) on a question of EU law.

As mentioned in our earlier blog, the Dutch legislator has prepared a bill – the Act on confirmation of private restructuring plans (Wet homologatie onderhands akkoord) – introducing a framework that allows debtors to restructure their debts outside formal insolvency proceedings (the “Dutch Scheme“). We expect this highly-anticipated bill to enter into force by this summer.

2019 was for many a year of waiting…we waited, and waited and indeed still wait…for Brexit. That inevitably has had an impact on the property world and in particular the investment market experiencing a degree of inactivity. Somewhat ironically though Brexit has given us one of several important decisions in 2019 relevant to the Real Estate Disputes world.

The validity of an assignment of receivables cross-border depends on the law that applies to the assignment.

What might amount to a valid assignment in one jurisdiction, does not mean, that it is valid in another and where there are competing claims to the receivables and competing jurisdictions, the question of which law applies and therefore whether there has been a valid assignment significantly affects the ability of the assignee to rely on the assignment.

The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has held once again that the Insolvency Directive does not require member states to put measures in place to fully fund lost pension rights on the insolvency of an employer. This conclusion is contrary to some reporting in the pensions press earlier today.

The European Court of Justice has handed down its decision in Pensions-Sicherungs-Verein VVaG v Günther Bauer. The case relates to Article 8 of Directive 2008/94/EC, which requires Member States to take measures to protect employees’ rights to old age benefits in the event of the employer's insolvency.

In this chapter of our Annual Insurance Review 2020, we look at the main developments in 2019 and expected issues in 2020 for restructuring and insolvency.

Key developments in 2019

In one of the leading insurance insolvency and restructuring cases of 2019, Ballantyne Re, plc (Ballantyne) used an Irish scheme of arrangement to restructure its reinsurance obligations and outstanding indebtedness (the Scheme).

To date, EU-wide insolvency legislation has focused on resolving conflicts of laws issues between Member States. Now that the Preventive Restructuring Framework Directive (the "Directive")¹ has successfully navigated its way through the Council and European Parliament (albeit with some significant amendments to the original text), all of that is set to change.

Case: Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration) [2018] EWHC 1980 (Ch), Hildyard J (27 July 2018)