From April 2016 companies and limited liability partnerships (“LLPs”) (except for publicly traded companies) will be required to create and maintain a register of persons with “significant control” over the company (“PSC Register”) and in due course send that information to Companies House where it will be publically searchable.

What’s the purpose of the new regulations?

From 6 April 2016 an application for an individual resident in England and Wales to go bankrupt will be an online procedure (in Northern Ireland, the changes will apply from November 2016). This change was brought about by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013.

A debtor will complete an online application to be reviewed by a newly created “Adjudicator”, where previously an application was made in person to the Court. As a result of the changes the court will only be involved in a minority of cases involving an appeal or a post-order application, thus freeing up court time.

Summary

Editor’s Note: Our good London colleague Ed Marlow recently published this as a Bryan Cave client advisory.

The case of K/S Victoria Street v House of Fraser (Stores Management) Ltd in 2011 clarified several important points under the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 relating to the release of covenants and the responsibilities of tenant and guarantor on assignment of a lease.

In giving the judgement for K/S Victoria Street Lord Neuberger commented obiter that the anti-avoidance provisions of the 1995 Act may prevent an assignment from a tenant to its guarantor, even if both parties wished it.

For all corporate insolvencies starting on or after 6 April 2016 insolvency office-holders are now required to submit a report on the conduct of anyone who was a director of the insolvent company in the 3 years leading up to the insolvency, irrespective of their conduct. Currently, reports are only required where office-holders consider a director’s conduct makes them unfit to be involved in a company’s management in the future.

The Court of Appeal has reiterated some important rules for funders involved in debt purchase. Banking Litigation specialist Alasdair Urwin looks at the recent case of Bibby Factors Northwest v HDF and MCD [1].

Buyer beware

This case concerned a factoring agreement, pursuant to which a funder (Bibby) purchased unpaid invoices from another company (the Assignor), including debts owing from the defendant companies (the Customers).

On 24 March, HMRC published a summary of responses to the December consultation on Company Distributions, together with details of the Government's position on the issues raised. The December consultation was covered in my 3 February blog.

It is now clear that leases cannot be assigned to the tenant’s guarantor but serious issues arise out of the recent High Court case of EMI Group Limited v O&H Q1 Limited which specified that any lease assignment by a tenant to its guarantor is void. This means that the assignment is not effective, the lease is still held by the previous tenant and the intended assignee remains the guarantor of that previous tenant (and does not become the new tenant of the lease). In addition, be aware that the court’s decision applies retrospectively.

BLP real estate disputes partner Roger Cohen summarises a recent court decision about whether or not a landlord had accepted a lease surrender by the way it handled “jingle mail”, a letter returning the keys, from the administrators of the insolvent tenant. Jingle mail is a tactic used by administrators. The landlord argued successfully that ,on this occasion, the tactic failed.