EDITOR’S NOTE: SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS WILL SOON BE LAUNCHING A NEW FAST-PACED AND EXCITING BLOG EXPANDING BEYOND TCPA TO SHOWCASE ITS TREMENDOUS DEPTH IN ISSUES OF FCRA, BIPA, CCPA AND CONSUMER PRIVACY LITIGATION GENERALLY. IN THE MEANTIME WE WILL BE TEMPORARILY HOUSING SOME OF THIS CONTENT HERE ON TCPAWORLD.COM. WE WILL LABEL THESE ARTICLES WITH SUBJECT MATTER BRACKETS.

This quick guide summarises the duties that directors of companies incorporated in Poland are subject to and how those duties change when the company is insolvent or at risk of being insolvent.

It also gives an overview of the personal risk to directors when the company is in financial difficulty.

This note is intended as an overview and should not be relied on as legal advice. Should you require legal advice in relation to your specific circumstances, please contact the Restructuring & Insolvency team member listed at the end of this note.

On the evening of Monday 23 March, 2020, the Australian Federal Government passed a broad range of stimulus measures under the Coronavirus Economic Response Package that is said to come into force immediately. The Coronavirus Economic Response Package is a temporary (six-month) relief package to combat the economic impacts of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak and to provide public health measures to prevent its spread.

The Australian Government has taken swift action to enact new legislation which significantly changes the insolvency laws relevant to all business as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 related developments.

Snapshot

It has been widely reported that, post Banking Royal Commission, the Australian Securities Investigation Commission (ASIC) will take a "why not litigate?" approach. As we foreshadowed in an article last month, this scrutiny will not be confined to the banking sector but is likely to extend to anyone subject to ASIC oversight.

In New South Wales (NSW), unlike in Victoria, claimants in liquidation have been able to make claims under Security of Payments Acts (SOPA). This has been recently reaffirmed in the case of Seymour Whyte Constructions Pty Ltd v Ostwald Bros Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) [2019] NSWCA 11 (Seymour), where the court doubled-down on this position and further explained why the NSW position differs from the position taken by the Victorian Court of Appeal in the infamous Faade Treatment Engineering Pty Ltd (in liq) v Brookfield Multiplex Constructions Pty Ltd [2016] VSCA 247 (Faade).

Without enforcement, an arbitration process and subsequent awards can be a pointless exercise. Freezing orders are an important tool in any dispute and a recent decision by the Supreme Court of Western Australia suggests that courts are willing to protect the enforceability of future awards.

In the recent case of Cash Generator Limited v Fortune and others [2018] EWHC 674 (Ch), the Court determined that non-compliance with the deemed consent procedure for nominating liquidators did not invalidate their appointment. The case provides a useful summary on the relatively new provisions governing the deemed consent procedure and welcome relief to Insolvency Practitioners (“IPs”) that a failure to fully comply with such provisions will not necessarily invalidate their appointment.

Brief facts and arguments

The Australian government has taken swift action to enact new legislation that significantly changes the insolvency laws relevant to all business as a result of the ongoing developments related to COVID-19

Different countries frame the exact description of the role of directors of a company in different terms. One feature is common to all – the obligation not to continue trading if a company is insolvent. Again, the detailed implications of doing so vary from one jurisdiction to another. However, this obligation not to continue wrongful trading is at the heart of trust in a market-based economic system