More than £46 billion has been lent or approved since March 2020 under the three loan schemes backed by the UK government – the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme, the Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan Scheme, and the Bounce Back Loan Scheme – and more than £30 billion of VAT has been deferred by the government.

A new Act, the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020, restricts many suppliers’ rights to exit commercial agreements due to restructuring or insolvency-related causes, even where those rights are expressly set out in the contract.

Since the release of the film Titanic in 1997, debate has persisted whether Rose could have shifted over slightly to let Jack onto the driftwood after they found themselves thrown from the sinking ship into the North Atlantic. Was there space? Would they both have frozen? Who knows.

Many individuals and businesses have experienced unprecedented challenges due to the restrictions imposed by the UK government in response to Covid-19. Significant reductions in income and, in some cases, temporary suspensions of trading have led to cashflow crises. Thanks to the government’s recent easing of restrictions, businesses in the hospitality, entertainment and holiday accommodation sectors have been able to re-open in accordance with the government’s safety guidelines.

On 26 June 2020, the eagerly anticipated Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (“CIGA”) came into force. The result is that the changes made to insolvency law will now hinder the ability of landlords to recover unpaid rent from its tenants. We look at how the provisions of CIGA do this and the remaining options available to landlords to recover overdue rent.

What has CIGA changed?

(a) Statutory demands

In what is likely to be one of this year’s landmark insolvency decisions, the Supreme Court in Bresco v Lonsdale has considered the interaction between insolvency set-off and adjudication, though the judgment is likely to have application to other dispute resolution processes including litigation and arbitration.

OVERVIEW

Introduction

On 26 June 2020 the UK Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (“CIGA”) entered into force. It represents a radical change in English insolvency law in that (among other things):

One of the most powerful tools for insolvency practitioners when investigating the affairs of an insolvent company where wrongdoing is suspected is section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (“IA 1986”). This confers power on English courts to order certain categories of parties to produce documents and an account of dealings relating to companies being wound up in the UK.

The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 came into force on 26 June bringing in measures to alleviate the burden on businesses during the Covid-19 pandemic and allow directors to focus their efforts on continuing to operate. In this article we consider the temporary changes to the wrongful trading regime and other key changes introduced by the Act.

Temporary wrongful trading relaxation

EDITORIAL by John Kimbell QC

Welcome to the first edition of Aviation News!

These are challenging and uncertain times for the aviation world. Covid-19 has temporarily grounded large numbers of commercial aircraft and rumours of airline insolvency abound as pictures of empty airports regularly appear in the press. Against this background, Thomas Macey-Dare QC considers the impact of airline insolvency on slot allocation and Mark Stiggelbout and Emily McWilliams discuss the potential impact of force majeure and frustration arguments based on the pandemic.

In what is likely to be one of this year’s landmark insolvency decisions, the Supreme Court in Bresco v Lonsdale has considered the interaction between insolvency set-off and adjudication, though the judgment is likely to have application to other dispute resolution processes including litigation and arbitration. The Supreme Court, unlike the High Court and Court of Appeal, permitted the adjudication to continue and, in doing so, dismissed the suggestion that insolvency set-off always results in the extinction of cross-claims to be replaced by a single claim for the balance.