Directors of Australian companies face significant personal monetary − and potential criminal and adverse professional - consequences if they allow the company to trade whilst insolvent.
Australian insolvent trading laws are harsher, and more frequently utilised to prosecute directors personally, than in many other jurisdictions including in the US and the UK.
Accordingly, frequent assessment of a company's solvency by its directors is crucial, particularly in financially difficult times, as are active steps to address any potential insolvency.
The COVID-19 outbreak, this week declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization, is presenting new and unprecedented challenges for businesses across the globe, including in Australia. Challenging trading conditions are bringing into sharp relief the duty of directors to avoid trading whilst the company is insolvent. The safe harbour provisions in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) provide an opportunity for directors to weather the storm, whilst avoiding personal liability for insolvent trading.
The perception of Australia as being a relatively “risky” place to sit on a Board has generally focused on the insolvent trading prohibition in section 588G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and how it interacts with general directors’ duties.[1]
Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Limited v Arjowiggins HKK 2 Limited CACV 158/2017 (date of judgment 5 August 2020)1
Introduction
As U.S.-based companies file for bankruptcy at record rates, international suppliers of products to those companies are feeling the pinch. Payments for past due invoices often are not paid promptly unless the supplier is a “critical vendor” to the filing entity. The financial impact to suppliers, however, may go far beyond mere non-payment. Suppliers may actually find themselves facing lawsuits seeking the return of payments they’ve already received. Fortunately, three steps suppliers can take now can help should they find themselves facing such a suit and needing legal assistance.
In March 2020, Business Secretary Alok Sharma announced that provisions on wrongful trading would be suspended. The move came as part of a wider package of measures that sought to provide assistance to businesses – and their beleaguered boards – experiencing financial distress due to Covid-19.
Now set out in the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA), which was passed on 26 June 2020, the provisions adapt the wrongful trading regime making directors’ liability for the “relevant period” unlikely.
Why does it matter?
Shenzhen Everich Supply Chain Co, Ltd (in Liquidation in the Mainland of the People's Republic of China) [2020] HKCFI 965 (date of judgment: 4 June 2020)
For the second time the Hong Kong Court has recognised a PRC winding-up proceeding and granted assistance to the administrator of a PRC company appointed by a PRC Court. The Hong Kong Court also granted the administrator an express right to take control of the company's subsidiaries in Hong Kong.
Background
At the time of this writing, it’s not exactly another day in paradise, over 103,000 Americans are no longer with us, there are an estimated 1,500,000 confirmed U.S. cases of the coronavirus, and I am also ballparking at 40,000,000+ unemployment claims filed at the time of this writing, because just two weeks ago it was at 36,500,000. Obviously, it’s not hard to see and hear more gloom and doom in the news about the plummeting economy in the U.S.
2020 ha sido un año atípico. La alerta sanitaria mundial provocada por la expansión del COVID-19 y la consecuente declaración del estado de alarma en España en marzo de 2020 llevaron a una vorágine legislativa sin precedentes. En este contexto, las empresas se encuentran inmersas en un escenario incierto en el que la toma de decisiones juega un papel clave para la viabilidad futura del negocio.
We are delighted to share with you our Financial Institutions Horizons 2021, which provides a snapshot of key legal topics and market trends across the globe, shaping the future of the financial institutions market.