The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the problems faced by high-street retailers. Store closures during lockdown, changing consumer behaviour and the resultant loss of turnover and profits have caused many businesses to seek to reduce their rent payments. Company Voluntary Arrangements (“CVAs”) have become fashionable tools for trying to secure such rent reductions.

The temporary restrictions that prohibit winding up proceedings where non-payment is COVID-19 related, and restrict petitions based on unsatisfied statutory demands, that would have come to an end on 31 December 2020 have been extended until 31 March 2021.

What are the restrictions?

Statutory demands

Creditors cannot rely upon an unpaid statutory demand as evidence of inability to pay debts in order to issue a winding-up petition against a company, effectively rendering the statutory demand void for that purpose.

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-1

The UK Government has announced that the temporary prohibition on forfeiture will be extended when the current prohibition comes to an end at the end of the year. The restriction, that prevents commercial landlords from forfeiting a lease for non-payment, will now be in place until 31 March 2021.

The case of Arlington Infrastructure Ltd (In Administration) v Woolrych [2020] EWHC 3123 (Ch) is a cautionary reminder to qualifying floating charge holders (and their advisors) to review the terms of all security documents, before seeking to appoint an administrator.

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.

On 26 November 2020, The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (Coronavirus) (Suspension of Liability for Wrongful Trading and Extension of the Relevant Period) Regulations 2020 (the “Regulations”) came into force.

In the recent case of Patel v Barlow’s Solicitors and others [2020] 2753 (Ch) the High Court found that a Quistclose Trust arose in a situation where solicitors were forwarded monies by a third party for a specific purpose.

Background

Ongoing uncertainties about the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with the looming deadline of Brexit, mean businesses and owners are in for a tough ride over the next few months, possibly much longer if the UK continues to face restrictions.

In the course of antecedent transaction proceedings, particularly for unfair preferences, arguably the most contentious and critical question to be determined is the date of insolvency. Although that question predominantly involves an accounting exercise, it also includes an assessment of the commercial, financial and trading realities of the relevant company and a consideration of legal principles.