Environment, social, and governance (ESG) are factors directors, investors, industries, and governments increasingly focus on when making commercial decisions. This is particularly so given increasing public awareness of such issues following recurrent environmental disasters and international summits such as COP26. Tim Symes and Ryan Hooton review the current regulatory environment in the UK, how it might bite on a company’s insolvency and when directors may find themselves personally liable for their actions.
The 1st April 2022 marks another notable event in the return to ‘normality’, this time for creditors, as restrictions on the issuing of Winding Up Petitions are lifted.
For the first time since restrictions were introduced in June 2020 by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020) (unusually with retrospective applicability to Winding Up Petitions issued after 27 April 2020), creditors are no longer subject to restrictions on when a Winding Up Petition can be issued.
Did you know it may be possible to continue using the trading name of your liquidated company?
TLT’s Insolvency Team in Belfast were recently successful in obtaining the leave of Court allowing the Director of a liquidated company to continue to use the trading name of the liquidated company with a new company. The Insolvency (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 makes provision for such an application to be made to use what would otherwise be a “Prohibited Name”.
On 30 March 2022, the English court sanctioned the most recent restructuring plan proposed by Smile Telecoms Holdings Limited (Smile).
From today (1 April), creditors can present a winding up petition without (a) having to give 21 days to the debtor company to make proposals to pay, and (b) being owed a debt(s) of £10,000. Given that all temporary restrictions and processes have now ended, the ‘gloves are off’ when it comes to debt collection.
Although presenting a winding up petition incurs a hefty court fee, the effect (or even threat) of a winding up petition can elicit a swift payment to avoid the consequences that an outstanding petition can present to a debtor company, including
The first case to consider the requirement of a monitor to terminate a moratorium if they think a company is unable to pay certain debts was heard by the High Court on 4 February 2021. The case provides further clarity on the UK standalone moratorium process and is an example of a moratorium being used in order to restrain secured creditor action.
On 28 March 2022, the Insolvency Service announced the end to all COVID-19 temporary measures, effective from 1 April 2022. Most measures had previously been revoked with the last of these measures being the restriction on winding up companies. This restriction was partially lifted in October last year in the course of the gradual phasing out of the restriction on winding up and it has now been lifted in its entirety. This could well lead to a significant increase in creditor activity following the inability to pursue most winding up petitions for a period of approximately two years.
The government has now announced that the remaining temporary restrictions created by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 are being lifted and that the insolvency regime will return to its pre-pandemic position with immediate effect from 1 April 2022. This includes removing the temporary restrictions placed on creditors when presenting winding-up petitions against debtors who are unable to pay debts they owe.
The English High Court case Duneau v Klimt Invest SA & Ors [2022] EWHC 596 (Ch) is perhaps the first decision where a public listed company was wound up under section 122(1)(g) of the UK Insolvency Act 1986 on the just and equitable ground for loss of substratum. The case also considered whether a public listed company can be subject to equitable considerations and constraints such as those which apply in the context of quasi-partnership cases.