header-logo header-logo

Dishonest directors: no more easy escapes?

10 September 2021 / Sophia Purkis , Judith Davidge
Issue: 7947 / Categories: Features , Profession , Insolvency , Commercial
printer mail-detail
56847
Sophia Purkis & Judith Davidge examine proposals to hold unscrupulous directors to account: do they go far enough?
  • The Rating (Coronavirus) and Directors Disqualification (Dissolved Companies) Bill intends to address the disparity which allows former directors of dissolved companies to escape investigation into their conduct.
  • The Bill is a step in the right direction, but it may not go far enough to deal with the actions of delinquent directors, and will not make much difference without more dedicated resources for the Insolvency Service.

The ability to dissolve companies without any formal insolvency process has long been used by the less than scrupulous to hide inappropriate behaviour. As the pandemic (hopefully) draws to an end, the government is seeking to take pre-emptive measures to tackle possible fraud arising from loans made to support companies during the pandemic and to deal with this issue.

The Rating (Coronavirus) and Directors Disqualification (Dissolved Companies) Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 12 May 2021.

Policymakers say the Insolvency

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll