In what is good news for many organisations struggling with the economic challenges posed by Covid-19, the UK's Business Secretary announced over the weekend that the government will push forward with various reforms to the English insolvency laws; in effect fast tracking reforms that were under discussion back in 2018.
The government has introduced a number of measures in order to assist businesses during the current Covid-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, for some businesses, this may not be enough to prevent their business entering some form of insolvency. Businesses and directors need to beware of the pitfalls that they could fall into, as they continue to trade. Two of the most common are Preference Payments and Transfers at Undervalue, both of which are discussed below.
Preference Payments
The Carluccio’s judgment provides some much-needed clarity on the interrelation of the Furlough Scheme and the requirements of insolvency legislation. It is to be commended for its clarity and for the fact that it had to construe the workings of the Furlough Scheme in the absence of any statutory guidance as to its implementation. It is to be hoped that, when the Government comes to enact the necessary legislative measures (including perhaps amendments to Schedule B1 and IR 2016), that it does so with this judgment very firmly in mind.
New insolvency measures to support businesses under pressure as a result of the coronavirus outbreak have been announced.
These new measures will include a moratorium for companies against creditor action while they seek a rescue or restructure, protection of a business’ right to purchase supplies (including electricity and broadband) to allow companies to continue trading during a moratorium, a new restructuring plan which would bind all creditors, and a suspension of wrongful trading provisions for three months from 1 March 2020.
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic presents directors of all business entities1 with a profound and unprecedented set of challenges. Now more than ever, key decision-takers in businesses appreciate that their actions will be carefully judged following the crisis. Scrutiny of their actions will come from a range of interested and affected parties including creditors, employees, trades unions, landlords, customers, regulators, insolvency practitioners and possibly even law enforcement.
Legal opinions can be complex, and certain areas require the provision of reasoning to support the opining firm’s conclusion. Parties should discuss and agree the scope of legal opinions as early as possible within the life cycle of a deal. This article discusses some common areas for consideration.
WHAT IS A LEGAL OPINION AND WHY IS IT USED?
Legal opinions are formal letters typically provided to confirm a specified legal position in relation to a document or a suite of transaction documents.
For example, a firm practising English law may be asked to opine on whether:
When a company director fails to carry out their legal responsibilities, they run the risk of being disqualified. This can be a lengthy procedure resulting in a period of disqualification during which it is not permitted to form, promote or manage a company.
The main law governing disqualification is contained in the Company Director Disqualification Act 1986.
Grounds for disqualification as a company director
* On March 30, 2020, Fried Frank published a memorandum titled COVID-19 Pandemic: Key UK Government and Bank of England Initiatives to Support Businesses ("March 30 Memorandum"). In light of the rapidly developing situation and government response, the March 30 Memorandum has been updated to include the latest guidance provided by the UK Government, in particular as to employment retention initiatives and loan schemes, and is current as of April 15, 2020.
On 28 March 2020, business secretary Alok Sharma announced plans to reform insolvency law to add new restructuring tools, including: