Legal Articles

The implementation of the Temporary Insolvency Practice Direction and what it means for Insolvency Practitioners

Home / Knowledge base / The implementation of the Temporary Insolvency Practice Direction and what it means for Insolvency Practitioners

Posted by Caroline Benfield on 16 April 2020

Caroline Benfield - Insolvency Lawyer
Caroline Benfield Partner

The current lockdown and social distancing measures introduced as a result of the coronavirus pandemic mean that courts are having to adjust to more flexible ways of operating, assisted by greater use of video and teleconferencing technology. Guidance of how this will work in practice for insolvency proceedings has been issued via the Temporary Insolvency Practice Direction. These directions will be in force from 6 April to 1 October (unless it is amended or revoked by another insolvency practice direction in the meantime) and apply to all insolvency hearings in the Business and Property Courts. Hearings outside London will be subject to variations as directed by the supervising judge.

Filing notices of intention to appoint an administrator (NOI) and a notice to appoint an administrator (NOA)

The submission of a NOI and NOA by CE-filing will be treated as being delivered to court at the date and time recorded in the Filing Submission Email. If a Notice arrives outside the court’s usual working hours of 10am to 4pm, it will be treated as having been delivered by 10am on the next day the court is open for business. All notices will be reviewed by the court as and when practical although any delay on the court’s part will not affect the validity or timing of the Notice.

Adjournment of pending applications and petitions

In an effort to husband the courts’ reduced resources, only genuinely urgent applications will be dealt with so all applications, petitions and claim forms listed for hearing before 21 April will be adjourned. The only exceptions are for winding-up and bankruptcy petitions and those applications that are considered by the relevant parties to be urgent and accepted as such by the judge (there are specific criteria used to assess the urgency of an application). These applications will be relisted as soon as practically possible at the relevant hearing centre with the administrative aspects being dealt with by either the ICC clerk or High Court Judge clerk.  

Remote hearings

All hearings will be conducted remotely via video or teleconferencing. Skype and BT MeetMe are the two applications referred to in the TIPD but there is scope for using other conferencing technology as agreed by the court. The temporary listing procedure will involve allocating time slots for groups of two or more petitions and there will be links to join a Skype (or other technology) meeting for each slot which will be published on the daily cause list. The parties involved must give notice of their intention to participate and must be able to access the given link (or arrange an alternative via the court clerk).

Other insolvency hearings

These will be held remotely via Skype (or other video conferencing technology) or recordable telephone conferencing. If the parties do not agree with the court’s proposed method of holding the hearing, they can suggest an alternative.  The judge will decide how the hearing should take place.

Statutory Declarations

Although the TIPD acknowledges that making statutory declarations other than in person effectively renders them defective, the current situation requires a more pragmatic response. Therefore, it is accepted that the courts will allow a statutory declaration to be made remotely, via video link, providing the person authorised to administer the oath confirms in writing that it was made in that way. This will give the court sufficient grounds to waive the defect unless it believes that ‘substantial injustice’ has been caused by the defect.

The TIPD demonstrates that, with careful planning and effective use of available technology, the courts can keep running albeit to rather altered timetables. The pandemic has forced everyone, including the justice system, of rethinking the way they work. The experience will prove invaluable in helping to streamline and modernise court services in future as no doubt there will be other circumstances that will arise, as yet unknown, to test all our systems. If you have any queries about how the TIPD might affect you, please contact a member of our insolvency team.

About the author

Caroline advises on all aspects of contentious and non-contentious personal and corporate insolvency matters.

Caroline Benfield

Caroline advises on all aspects of contentious and non-contentious personal and corporate insolvency matters.

Recent articles

30 July 2020 Rethinking the landlord / tenant relationship

We have been following the travails of the high street for over 12 months where changing shopping habits, business rates and rent increases have been contributing to a growing strain on many landlord / tenant relationships.

Read article
30 July 2020 Bankrupts fail in claim to have interests in land revested in them

The claim by Mr and Mrs Brake (Brake v Swift), heard in the High Court in May, to have a cottage and adjacent land revested in them under Section 283A of the Insolvency Act 1986, was set against a background of convoluted litigation extending over a number of years, described by Matthews HHJ as ‘complex’.

Read article
29 July 2020 Remote witnessing of wills – a sign of the times

The law governing how a will is witnessed dates back to 1837 and for good reason. The requirement for two people (neither of whom can inherit from the will they are witnessing) to be physically present at the signing of a will is designed to, among other things, prevent fraud and the exercise of undue influence. That is, until the Covid-19 pandemic struck.

Read article
How can we help?
01926 732512