header-logo header-logo

30 March 2020
Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Commercial
printer mail-detail

COVID-19: Company directors given breathing space

Insolvency lawyers have welcomed the government’s decision to suspend the wrongful trading law during the COVID-19 pandemic, but raised questions about preferential paying

Currently, directors of limited liability companies can become personally liable for business debts, under the Insolvency Act 1986, if they continue to trade while unable to pay their debts (wrongful trading). There does not need to be any fraudulent intent, only poor judgment or wishful thinking.

Last week, however, the government announced a package of measures for businesses, including suspending wrongful trading provisions for three months, backdated to 1 March, to protect company directors from the threat of personal liability.

Other measures include enabling companies either to hold AGMs online or postpone the meetings, and granting a three-month extension to the filing of company accounts. Business Secretary Alok Sharma said the measures would give bosses ‘much-needed breathing space to keep their workers employed and their companies going’.

Jennifer Marshall, president of the Insolvency Lawyers Association, said: ‘Suspending wrongful trading, in particular, will assist directors in accessing government or bank funding without concerns regarding personal liability.’

Frances Coulson, senior partner and head of insolvency at Moon Beever, said: ‘Everyone is banging on about wrongful trading but no one has really mentioned sanctioning the ability to preferentially pay suppliers.

‘Bad directors often make preferential payments to keep certain suppliers sweet so they transfer over to a newco, dumping other creditors, particularly involuntary creditors such as utilities and local councils as well as HMRC (until this December when HMRC will become a preferential creditor again).’

Coulson said the ‘well-intentioned’ suspension ‘won’t rescue long term abusers of credit, but will help cover the instant crisis.

‘The changes also look as if they will allow preferential payments to suppliers, in order to enable continuation of trading. This needs to be carefully framed, as such preferences are often made solely to shift the business away from creditors rather than to keep the existing company going. Directors need a moratorium now for good reason but must not forget their statutory duties. Consultation with insolvency professionals now might save pain later.’

Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll