Welcome to the latest in the series of blogs from Fenchurch Law: 100 cases every policyholder needs to know. An opinionated and practical guide to the most important insurance decisions relating to the London / English insurance markets, all looked at from a pro-policyholder perspective.
Some cases are correctly decided and positive for policyholders. We celebrate those cases as The Good.
Some cases are, in our view, bad for policyholders, wrongly decided, and in need of being overturned. We highlight those decisions as The Bad.
In addition to new legislation mentioned elsewhere in this round-up (see links to other sections), commercial and tech businesses and in-house counsel should note:
The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act
The case of Arlington Infrastructure Ltd (In Administration) v Woolrych [2020] EWHC 3123 (Ch) is a cautionary reminder to qualifying floating charge holders (and their advisors) to review the terms of all security documents, before seeking to appoint an administrator.
COVID PROTECTIONS EXTENDED TO GIVE BUSINESSES A LAST CHANCE TO PLAN RECOVERY. TIME TO CONSIDER A COVID-19 CVA?
If the announcements last week on the lack of downward tier revisions for many areas is the bad news, the silver lining for the struggling and affected businesses came in the reinstatement of the temporary suspension on the use of statutory demands and winding up petitions until 31 March 2021.
Disputes between directors often arise because of, and/or result in, disputes about company money. Directors need to be alert to how they are required to act, particularly in times of conflict. Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 imposes a broad duty on directors to promote the success of the company however the term “success” is unhelpfully uncertain, especially where the company is in difficulty and/or where the company is wound up.
Speed read: Rachel Clark considers whether draft new regulations requiring scrutiny of pre-pack sales to connected parties will be enough to prevent fraud and restore confidence in the process.
Once likened to sustaining ‘Frankenstein monsters’, the use of ‘pre-packs’ is controversial.
Whilst not defined by statute, the term ‘pre-pack’ is commonly used to mean an arrangement to sell all or a substantial part of a business prior to the company entering administration, with the administrator then completing the sale.
Hot on the heels of the landmark changes to the insolvency landscape brought by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA) (see our previous article on CIGA), the Government recently announced reforms relating to pre-packaged administration sales to connected parties.
On 3 December 2020, HM Treasury published the Government's proposal to implement a new special administration regime for PIs and EMIs (PI and EMI SAR), a copy of which can be seen here.
The UK government has published new draft regulations to require mandatory scrutiny of administration sales to connected parties (such as the insolvent company’s existing directors or shareholders).
In the UK, a "pre-pack" is an arrangement under which the sale of all or part of a company’s business or assets is agreed with a purchaser prior to the appointment of administrators. The sale is carried out by the administrators immediately on, or shortly after, their appointment. Administrators must be licensed insolvency practitioners.
In a not unexpected move with restrictions on the general public expected to remain well into the New Year the Government has extended the protections for commercial tenants and the restrictions on filing statutory demands and winding up petitions for COVID-19 related debts until the end of March 2021. The Government's announcement referred to these being the "final extensions".