80
Legal Focus
JULY 2013
Insolvency and the Balance Sheet Test
In light of the recent decision by the UK Supreme Court in the case BNY Corporate Trustee Services Limited and others v Eurosail-UK 2007-3BL PLC – concerning the use of “balance sheet” tests for insolvency, Lawyer Monthly speaks to John Houghton, the global co-chair of the Insolvency Practice and head of the European Restructuring, Insolvency and Workouts Practice at Latham and Watkins. Please introduce yourself, your role and your firm.
The Latham & Watkins European Restructuring Group specialises in advising creditors, secondary debt traders, sponsors, insolvency practitioners, insolvent companies and their directors on all areas of international restructurings, insolvency and corporate rescues. It is one of the few firms which can deliver a fully integrated global restructuring and insolvency practice, including a full service European Restructuring practice and a leading practice in the US.
What are the key legal issues businesses face relating to insolvency and corporate recovery in the UK?
As a director of a business in financial distress, you face a difficult juggling act. On the one hand you want to ensure the business stays afloat, keeps trading and holds on to an untarnished reputation. Perception is key, and as soon as ‘cracks in the wall’ become evident, for example when a company hires a financial adviser to ‘consider its options’, confidence will wane and the markets will react. On the other hand, directors have to be extremely careful that they do not breach their common law and statutory duties, including the crucial one: to act in good faith and to promote the success of the company.
Once the company has entered the “zone of insolvency”, to avoid liability for wrongful trading (as per s. 214 IA 1986) – and risk being required by the court to contribute personally to the company’s assets and to be disqualified as a director – it
www.lawyer-monthly.com
becomes the directors’ duty to take every step to minimise loss to creditors, and so this represents a fundamental shift away from the shareholders, who are likely to be the constituency that the directors most usually have at the forefront of their minds. This duty is echoed by s. 172(3) Companies Act 2006, which states that the duty to promote the success of the company “has effect subject to any enactment or rule of law requiring directors, in certain circumstances, to consider or act in the interests of creditors of the company.” What a director knows, or must be taken to know, is assessed by a mixture of objective as well as subjective tests so a finance director, for example, could find himself under much heavier scrutiny than say a purely operationally – focused director. It is often a tricky balance; when will action be regarded as timely? A director could just as easily be criticised for filing too early for example, and be accused of jeopardising the company’s survival and the value of its assets.
Can you give me a brief overview of the balance sheet insolvency test?
The balance sheet test cuts across many aspects of insolvency law and restructuring practice, not just in the area of wrongful trading. For example: (a) it is a gating item as regards the appointment of an administrator; (b) it is often a specific event of default in loan and bond documentation; (c) it is used to ascertain whether there are grounds to disqualify a director and (d) it will determine the “relevant time” as regards any attempt by a liquidator or administrator to set aside a pre- insolvency transaction.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132