The topic of net neutrality has continued to be at the forefront of public discourse over recent years. This is the result of the FCC’s repeated attempts to impose regulations designed to protect consumers while at the same time telecom companies seek to control their product and the services they provide without what they contend is burdensome regulation. This summer, in U.S. Telecommunication Association v. FCC, the D.C.

Significant changes have taken effect and are expected to continue within the education sector, the result of which may lead to an increase in restructuring activity and additional pressure on funding streams.

Last week this author delved into what has become known as the “Texas Two-Step,” the arguments for and against its permissibility and the broader implications for the bankruptcy system.

In our earlier blog, we considered the application to strike out the challenge against the Caffè Nero company voluntary arrangement (“CVA”) (Nero Holdings Ltd v Young) and the rejection of Caffè Nero’s strike-out action by the Court.

The recent case of Manolete Partners Plc v Hayward and Barrett Holdings Ltd [2021] EWHC 1481 (Ch) impacts both insolvency practitioners and assignees of insolvency claims, potentially making such claims more expensive to bring and a procedural burden by requiring (depending on the nature of the pleaded claims) two sets of proceedings, even though the claims arise from the same facts.

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

In 2020, bankruptcy court doors continued to be shut to cannabis companies. Perhaps most troubling is the continued bar for companies that are only tangentially involved in the state-legalized cannabis industry. Although outlier cases exist, and even though courts have hinted that bankruptcy may be appropriate for some cannabis-related individuals and companies in some situations, there is a consensus now that bankruptcy is generally not available to individuals and companies engaged, directly or indirectly, in the cannabis industry.

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

As we discussed in our previous blog relating to the Supplier of Last Resort Process, energy company insolvencies bring with them a range of different processes and requirements which other companies do not need to consider.

On 25 June 2020 the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act received Royal Assent, making some of the biggest changes to UK insolvency laws in the last 30 years. We have written several blogs covering the changes and how they help support distressed businesses, impact suppliers, lenders and other third parties and have tracked the changes through the UK parliament.