1. Introduction

The Insolvency Rules 1986 have been revoked and the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016) come into force today. There are 22 Parts and 11 Schedules. Each Part is intended to cover a specific process or area, for example:

Key Points

The wait is almost over!

As reported in our recent blog Rules of Engagement for Creditors, the Insolvency Rules (England and Wales) 2016 (“IR2016”) are about to arrive heralding procedural reforms effective (subject to transitional provisions) on 6th April 2017.

The Insolvency Rules 2016 (the 2016 Rules) have effect from 6 April 2016. A key change introduced by the 2016 Rules is a new approach to decision making, including a deemed consent procedure. The new approach is designed to ease the administrative and cost burden in insolvency proceedings, and is summarised below.

Deemed consent

Applications

Rule 12 sets out rules relating to applications, (excluding administration applications, winding up petitions and creditors' bankruptcy petitions) including:

A set of new insolvency rules are coming into force, as of April 6 2017, as Stephen Young explains in the following bulletin. In short, the previous insolvency rules that have been in force since 1986 no longer apply and instead a whole new set of rules now must be used.

The new Insolvency (England & Wales) 2016 rules will apply to all cases, both existing and new.

In short, the main changes are as follows:

1. All of the Parts and Numbering of the old rules have been completely changed so each type of insolvency has its own new Part.

In the recent case of South Coast Construction v Iverson Road Limited [2017] EWHC 61 (TCC), South Coast Construction ("South Coast") had obtained an adjudicator’s decision against the employer, Iverson Road Limited (“Iverson Road”), in a sum approaching £900,000. Iverson Road refused to pay the award so South Coast commenced enforcement proceedings in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC).

Summary

Clarification on when the court should lift the administration moratorium in respect of litigation.

The Facts

Introduction

Amit has recently acted for an IP whose office is one of the largest appointment takers in the country. He appeared for the respondent at several hearings on an application to review a BTO.

Background

The out-going officeholder had his licence revoked by the IPA for misappropriation of monies, running to six figures, from numerous estates. This resulted in a BTO, which was granted by the Court on paper.

The Facts

The applicants, who had successfully appealed the rejection of their proof of debt by the liquidator of Burnden Group Limited, sought an order that the liquidator pay their costs of the appeal personally in circumstances where the relevant company had no assets and their costs exceeded £290,000 (including VAT).

The Decision