Significant Steps Towards More Creditor Controlled Insolvency

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Significant Steps Towards More Creditor Controlled Insolvency 18 Loan Market Association LMA News December 2010 Significant steps towards more creditor controlled insolvency proceedings in Germany A slide up to harmonised standards in national European insolvency regimes bypassing the European lawmaker Frank Grell, Finance and Litigation Partner (Hamburg) and Chair of German Restructuring and Insolvency Practice – Latham & Watkins Dr. Ulrich Klockenbrink, Finance Associate (Hamburg) – Latham & Watkins Full harmonisation of insolvency laws in the Act of 1999. Moreover, the reform will improve European Union is still a very long way off. the creditors’ position in insolvency proceedings Forum shopping between different insolvency in general. Similar steps have either already regimes has therefore been on the agendas of been taken or are envisaged at a national level both creditors and debtors in every significant in other major European jurisdictions, such as restructuring process in the last few years. In the UK, France, Italy and Spain. Germany, debtors have been contemplating Frank Grell and implementing a shift of the place of effective Creditor influence on the appointment management to the US in order to benefit from of insolvency administrators the protection for debtor companies under Although the fundamental principle of the Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code. By German Insolvency Act is optimum creditor contrast, it has been routine for creditors to satisfaction, creditors have not had a formal consider and, in some cases implement, a say in the appointment of the insolvency shift of the debtor company’s centre of main administrators in charge of actually achieving interest (COMI) to the UK, in order to benefit such satisfaction. Instead, the insolvency from the more creditor controlled schemes of administrators are chosen and appointed by Dr. Ulrich Klockenbrink arrangement. This especially applies to UK the insolvency court. In the past, this court-led or US banks and hedge funds acting as main appointment process has posed significant creditors in major German restructurings. In uncertainties with respect to the implementation the past, such lenders perceived Germany to of pre-arranged – and therefore efficient – be a country where restructuring was hardly restructuring plans agreed between the main possible and liquidation the likely outcome creditors. While it is fair to say that 95% of the of insolvency proceedings. That perception insolvency administrators have been very has changed over the last few years, but the reasonable and commercially minded, uncertainties surrounding the rules and creditors have not been able to rely on the practice of German insolvency proceedings appointment of the particular insolvency continued to make out-of-court restructurings administrator who negotiated and consented the preferred route. Accordingly, the to the restructuring plan beforehand as the ‘insolvency threat’, i.e. the announcement courts were free to appoint another administrator. of the decision to file for insolvency, has, This will change with the insolvency reform: until now, been the inevitable part of any prior to the appointment of an insolvency German restructuring discussion. administrator, the insolvency courts will be In response to the above and ahead of any required to consult with the main creditors. harmonisation attempts at an EU level, the Under the current proposals, the court is German legislator has proposed a substantial obliged to appoint a person as administrator insolvency law reform, which hopefully will if that person is backed by a clear majority of become effective early next year. The reform the creditors. If this majority is based on the is focusing on the improvement of insolvency amount of outstanding claims and not on a plan proceedings and Chapter 11-like majority in number, lenders will have significant debtor-in-possession proceedings, which were leverage in the appointment process. In fact, initially incorporated in the German Insolvency they will be able to prepare pre-packed deals Loan Market Association LMA News December 2010 19 and install an insolvency administrator who Once the proposed insolvency reform is is willing and able to implement such a deal implemented, the exercise of all shareholders’ (providing no doubts have arisen as to rights can be made subject to plans of whether that person will act as an independent reorganisation. This includes shareholder In continental administrator). For UK readers, this may resolutions on capital reductions, capital sound like something one would expect from increases without pre-emption rights on new Europe, Germany the appointment process for an insolvency shares and contributions in kind as constructive is leading the way administrator. However in continental Europe, elements of a debt-equity-swap. Therefore, in implementing Germany is leading the way in implementing shareholders of a debtor company can be creditors’ rights creditors’ rights to a say in the appointment expropriated by majority class vote on plans of insolvency administrators. of reorganisation provided they get ‘adequate’ to a say in the compensation. Where the shareholders are appointment Debt-equity-swaps in plans of out of the money though, ‘adequate’ may of insolvency reorganisation even mean nothing. Shareholder consent is administrators. A second revolution in German insolvency law effectively not necessary for such debt-equity- will be that in the future creditors will be able to swaps since shareholders as a voting class go into equity more easily, as debt-equity-swaps can be crammed down. will be incorporated in the German Insolvency In the UK, debt-equity-swaps have been Act. In the past, share pledge enforcements an important corporate rescue tool for a long were the means by which creditors gained time. Unlike in Germany, there is no fixed corporate control over the debtor company format for debt-equity-swaps, and they may be and benefited from a turnaround economically. implemented within or outside the framework However, due to certain legal uncertainties, of a statutory procedure, depending on the share pledges were rarely enforced in Germany. terms of the finance documents and the level Instead, creditors used their share pledges as of support of the shareholders and creditors. a way of threatening shareholders into making Where the security documents require a further restructuring contributions or turning high consent threshold that is unlikely to over their shares to a trustee. be achieved by consensual negotiation, a 20 Loan Market Association LMA News December 2010 Significant steps towards more creditor controlled insolvency proceedings in Germany Continued from page 19 debt-equity-swap can be implemented via for granting self-administration will be a scheme of arrangement or a company significantly reduced. Moreover, companies voluntary arrangement. If approved by the will be able to enter into debtor-in-possession necessary majorities and, in the case of a proceedings at an earlier stage: where scheme, sanctioned by the court, they will management files for insolvency in the case bind all members or creditors of that class. of imminent, but not yet actual illiquidity An alternative means of ‘cramming down’ (i.e. earlier than in most cases in the past), dissenting creditors and shareholders may be preliminary insolvency proceedings can be the use of a pre-packaged administration sale launched as preliminary debtor-in-possession of the shares in a holding company in order to proceedings. This enables the management transfer ownership of the operating company and the creditors to prepare and negotiate to a third party or ‘in the money’ creditor class. a plan of reorganisation during the three month In France, for companies that have at least period of preliminary insolvency proceedings. 150 employees and revenues in excess of The proceedings will be overseen by a € 20 mn, a safeguard or reorganisation plan preliminary trustee, who will be appointed can provide for debt-equity-swaps subject according to a suggestion made by the to approval by three separate creditors’ management of the insolvent company. committees, one comprising the main suppliers According to the current proposal, the of the debtor, another comprising its lenders management’s request for preliminary holding bank debt and the last comprising self-administration can only be rejected by its bondholders. Spain’s insolvency regime the court where a restructuring of the debtor provides for debt-equity-swaps which often company is obviously unpromising. take the form of participative loans. In addition, These new rules will have a significant debt-equity-swaps may be proposed by impact on the economic and legal position either the debtor or the creditor as part of of creditors. On the one hand, creditors will the settlement proposal. face insolvency proceedings at an earlier stage, as the management of the debtor Improvements in chapter 11-like company is clearly incentivised to file debtor-in-possession proceedings immediately for insolvency if there is an A third goal of the German insolvency law imminent illiquidity, thereby avoiding any risk of reform is to improve the Chapter 11-like criminal charges for delayed filing. On the other debtor-in-possession proceedings that hand, creditors – especially major creditors like were incorporated into the German Insolvency the lenders – will have the chance to negotiate Code in 1999. Since then, self-administration and to finalise a plan of reorganisation during has been granted in less
Recommended publications
  • All You Need to Know About Becoming an Insolvency Practitioner In
    REMUNERATION OF INSOLVENCY PRACTITIONERS This time we bring you a real scoop. Insolvency law, legal status and remuneration of the insolvency practitioners, has completely changed in Poland! Judge Anna Hrycaj, who presented this subject at the ACC conference in Warsaw last year, and who was asked to adapt her presentation to the needs of our journal, was obliged to write a new article, because Poland was surprised a couple of weeks ago by a new law… So, we are proud to offer you an analysis of the new requirements for becoming an IP in Poland. If you have any questions, please write to [email protected] or [email protected] for further information. All you need to know about becoming an Insolvency Practitioner in Europe: Poland We have already looked at the legal status and remuneration of insolvency practitioners in France, Austria and Latvia. Here we discuss what happens in Poland The legal status of the Insolvency and the court does not deprive the • He/she has the full legal capacity to act; Practitioner (IP) in Poland is soon to be debtor of the right to administer the • He/she is under 65; regulated not only by the provisions of estate; • He/she received higher education the Bankruptcy and Rehabilitation Law, • The receiver ( zarz ądca ), who is qualifications and obtained an MA or 28 February 2003, but also by the appointed in the case of insolvency any other correspondent title in the provisions of the Polish law on IPs which with the possibility of making an member states mentioned above; was enacted by the Polish Parliament on arrangement with creditors, but the • He/she has an unblemished 9 May 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Become an Insolvency Practitioner In
    REMUNERATION OF INSOLVENCY PRACTITIONERS The article is provided by Devorah Burns of the national organisation The Insolvency Service, based in London. The Insolvency Service operates under a statutory framework – mainly the Insolvency Acts 1986 and 2000, the Company Directors Disqualifications Act 1986 and the Employment Rights Act 1996. If you have any questions on this article, please send them to the author at Devorah.Burns @insolvency.gsi.gov.uk or [email protected] We welcome further contributions to this series, so if you would like to inform our readers of the regulations for becoming an IP in your jurisdiction, please contact the editors. All you need to know about becoming an Insolvency Practitioner: Great Britain The latest in our series of articles on the legal status and remuneration of insolvency practitioners examines the British rules and regulations Access to to pay an annual fee, which covers the costs Insolvency Practitioners in the profession associated with authorisation and England, Wales & Scotland. regulation. The Insolvency Service is responsible for The Secretary of State (SoS) may authorise EU Directive 2005/36 provides for the the regulation of insolvency practitioners insolvency practitioners, as may seven recognition of professional qualifications working in Great Britain (i.e. England, professional bodies (the RPBs). The RPBs throughout the relevant states and The Wales & Scotland) and the Department for represent accountants, lawyers and those European Communities (Recognition of Enterprise, Trade & Investment in Northern who only work as insolvency practitioners. Professional Qualifications) Regulations Ireland is responsible for the regulation Most insolvency practitioners are 2007 (The Regulations) make provision of insolvency practitioners who work in authorised by one of the RPBs.
    [Show full text]
  • UK (England and Wales)
    Restructuring and Insolvency 2006/07 Country Q&A UK (England and Wales) UK (England and Wales) Lyndon Norley, Partha Kar and Graham Lane, Kirkland and Ellis International LLP www.practicallaw.com/2-202-0910 SECURITY AND PRIORITIES ■ Floating charge. A floating charge can be taken over a variety of assets (both existing and future), which fluctuate from 1. What are the most common forms of security taken in rela- day to day. It is usually taken over a debtor's whole business tion to immovable and movable property? Are any specific and undertaking. formalities required for the creation of security by compa- nies? Unlike a fixed charge, a floating charge does not attach to a particular asset, but rather "floats" above one or more assets. During this time, the debtor is free to sell or dispose of the Immovable property assets without the creditor's consent. However, if a default specified in the charge document occurs, the floating charge The most common types of security for immovable property are: will "crystallise" into a fixed charge, which attaches to and encumbers specific assets. ■ Mortgage. A legal mortgage is the main form of security interest over real property. It historically involved legal title If a floating charge over all or substantially all of a com- to a debtor's property being transferred to the creditor as pany's assets has been created before 15 September 2003, security for a claim. The debtor retained possession of the it can be enforced by appointing an administrative receiver. property, but only recovered legal ownership when it repaid On default, the administrative receiver takes control of the the secured debt in full.
    [Show full text]
  • Insolvency Review Insolvency Review
    the Insolvency Review Insolvency Insolvency Review Sixth Edition Editor Donald S Bernstein Sixth Edition Sixth lawreviews © 2018 Law Business Research Ltd Insolvency Review Sixth Edition Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd This article was first published in November 2018 For further information please contact [email protected] Editor Donald S Bernstein lawreviews © 2018 Law Business Research Ltd PUBLISHER Tom Barnes SENIOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT MANAGER Nick Barette BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS Thomas Lee, Joel Woods SENIOR ACCOUNT MANAGER Pere Aspinall ACCOUNT MANAGERS Jack Bagnall, Sophie Emberson, Katie Hodgetts PRODUCT MARKETING EXECUTIVE Rebecca Mogridge RESEARCHER Keavy Hunnigal-Gaw EDITORIAL COORDINATOR Gavin Jordan HEAD OF PRODUCTION Adam Myers PRODUCTION EDITOR Martin Roach SUBEDITOR Helen Smith CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Paul Howarth Published in the United Kingdom by Law Business Research Ltd, London 87 Lancaster Road, London, W11 1QQ, UK © 2018 Law Business Research Ltd www.TheLawReviews.co.uk No photocopying: copyright licences do not apply. The information provided in this publication is general and may not apply in a specific situation, nor does it necessarily represent the views of authors’ firms or their clients. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any legal action based on the information provided. The publishers accept no responsibility for any acts or omissions contained herein. Although the information provided is accurate as of September 2018, be advised that this is
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit: a Unique Irish Opportunity for Cross-Border Restructuring? 14.02.2019
    briefing Brexit: a Unique Irish Opportunity for Cross-Border Restructuring? 14.02.2019 Certainty is a key element in any business planning. For corporate restructuring practitioners who are planning or working on cross border transactions, the uncertainty relating to Brexit and the departure of the United Kingdom from the European Union (“EU”) may have long-term significant consequences and a “no-deal” Brexit (without a withdrawal agreement and the certainty of a transition period) will have immediate and significant consequences for any such cross-border transaction. In this context, Irish law and the Irish Courts can provide practical and effective solutions to assist corporates (and their advisors) restructure their business and affairs in a straight-forward and easily understood manner. It is also an opportunity for the Irish legal system to demonstrate its value to international practitioners. This opportunity was also recognised in a recent proposal document to the Irish Government produced by the Law Society of Ireland and the Bar Council of Ireland entitled “Promoting Ireland as a leading centre globally for international legal services” (the “Report”). In the context of the UK’s exit from the EU, the Report states that “we foresee a meaningful role for Irish law in certain areas and industry sectors allied with the provision of a greater range of legal services in Ireland for the benefit of international and Irish business. In a number of sectors, we believe that Ireland as a location and the Irish law and the Irish Courts are and can be advantageous contractual choices for international clients (now or in the future)”.
    [Show full text]
  • Cross-Border Recognition of Insolvency and Restructuring Proceedings Post-Brexit
    CROSS-BORDER RECOGNITION OF INSOLVENCY AND RESTRUCTURING PROCEEDINGS POST-BREXIT AND RESTRUCTURING PROCEEDINGS INSOLVENCY OF RECOGNITION CROSS-BORDER KEY POINTS Despite the announcement of a new free trade agreement between the EU and UK, Feature we are effectively in a “no deal” scenario when it comes to the recognition of insolvency proceedings and, more generally, civil judgments, between the EU and the UK. The reciprocal, automatic recognition frameworks are no more. Debtors and insolvency practitioners must now navigate through a patchwork of international treaties, European legislation, domestic legislation and common law to assess whether inbound/outbound recognition is forthcoming and, if it is, what that “recognition” really looks like in practice. The lack of an automatic recognition regime will likely increase the cost, complexity and time taken to complete cross-border restructurings and insolvencies. However, it should not be equated with a loss of recognition per se. There may be more pathways to navigate but the analysis is not, by any means, insurmountable. Over time, as debtors become more familiar with the post-Brexit legal landscape, a clear and well-trodden path to obtaining recognition will likely emerge. Authors Philip Wells and Lucy Aconley How to get recognised: cross-border recognition of insolvency and restructuring proceedings post-Brexit This article summarises the post-Brexit position regarding inbound and outbound This article focusses on cross-border recognition of insolvency and restructuring proceedings
    [Show full text]
  • Irish Examinership: Post-Eircom a Look at Ireland's Fastest and Largest
    A look at Ireland’s fastest and largest restructuring through examinership and the implications for the process Irish examinership: post-eircom A look at Ireland’s fastest and largest restructuring through examinership and the implications for the process* David Baxter Tanya Sheridan A&L Goodbody, Dublin A&L Goodbody [email protected] The Irish telecommunications company eircom recently successfully concluded its restructuring through the Irish examinership process. This examinership is both the largest in terms of the overall quantum of debt that was restructured and also the largest successful restructuring through examinership in Ireland to date. The speed with which the restructuring of this strategically important company was concluded was due in large part to the degree of pre-negotiation between the company and its lenders before the process commenced. The eircom examinership demonstrated the degree to which an element of pre-negotiation can compliment the process. The advantages of the process, having been highlighted through the eircom examinership, might attract distressed companies from other EU jurisdictions to undertake a COMI shift to Ireland in order to avail of this process. he eircom examinership was notable for both the Irish High Court just 54 days after the companies Tsize of this debt restructuring and the speed in entered examinership. which the process was successfully concluded. In all, This restructuring also demonstrates the advantages €1.4bn of a total debt of approximately €4bn was of examinership as a ‘one-stop shop’: a flexible process written off the balance sheets of the eircom operating that allows for both the write-off of debt and the change companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Rescue Process”
    COMPANY LAW REVIEW GROUP REPORT ADVISING ON A LEGAL STRUCTURE FOR THE RESCUE OF SMALL COMPANIES 22 OCTOBER 2020 1 | P a g e Contents Chairperson’s Letter to the Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation 4 1. Introduction to the Report 5 1.1. The Company Law Review Group ................................................................... 5 1.2 The Role of the CLRG ...................................................................................... 5 1.3 Policy Development........................................................................................ 5 1.4 Contact information ....................................................................................... 5 2. The Company Law Review Group Membership…………………………………………….….6 2.1 Membership of the Company Law Review Group ............................................ 6 3. The Work Programme ............................................................................................. 8 3.1 Introduction to the Work Programme ............................................................ 8 3.2 Company Law Review Group Work Programme 2018-2020 .............................. 8 3.3 Additional item to the Work Programme ........................................................ 9 3.4 Decision making process of the Company Law Review Group……………… ... ……..9 3.5 Committees of the Company Law Review Group ..... ….………………………………..…9 4. A Rescue Plan for SMEs ............................................................................................... 10 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Pack Sales to Connected Parties the New Evaluator Process Considerations for Administrators and Purchasers EMEA – UK – April 6
    Pre-pack Sales to Connected Parties The New Evaluator Process Considerations for Administrators and Purchasers EMEA – UK – April 6 From 30 April 2021, an administrator will be unable to complete a sale of a substantial part of a company’s property to a connected person within the first eight weeks of the administration without either: • The approval of creditors • An independent written opinion (positive or negative) This alert considers the impact of the new regulations in practice, which apply to both pre-packs and post-packs that take place within eight weeks of an administrator’s appointment. This alert is not intended to, and does not, constitute legal advice. Squire Patton Boggs (UK) LLP accepts no liability for any losses occasioned to any person by reason of any action Who is a connected party? or inaction as a result of the contents of this note. Should you require legal advice in relation to your specific circumstances, This is defined in paragraph 60A(3) of Schedule B1 to the please contact one of our Restructuring & Insolvency team Insolvency Act 1986 and will cover the typical pre-pack members whose contact details are at the end of this note where an administrator sells the business back to existing and who would be happy to assist you. management/shareholders even if there is a new financial backer of the buyer. When is an evaluator’s report required? Can a report be obtained after the sale The definition of connected person includes directors, shadow directors or other officers of the company, as well as has completed? “connected companies”.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2020 COVID-19 and EXAMINERSHIP – WHAT the EXAMINER WANTS YOU to KNOW
    April 2020 COVID-19 AND EXAMINERSHIP – WHAT THE EXAMINER WANTS YOU TO KNOW For further information Following our articles on: on any of the issues discussed in this article 1. Emergency liquidity for businesses adversely affected by the please contact: economic impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic: https://www.dilloneustace.com/legal-updates/the-abc-and- de-of-emergency-liquidity-solutions; 2. Standstill Agreements as the first item out of the financial first aid kit: https://www.dilloneustace.com/legal- updates/running-to-standstill; and 3. Ireland’s public sector lifeboat for SMEs and small mid-cap businesses: https://www.dilloneustace.com/legal- updates/liquid-spirit-government-guaranteed-working-capital- facilities-for-irish-smes-adversely-affected-by-the-covid-19- pandemic, Jamie Ensor Partner, Insolvency we turn to the main items for consideration by stakeholders in DD: + 353 (0)1 673 1722 circumstances where examinership is the chosen mechanism for [email protected] rehabilitation and long term recovery for a company in financial difficulty as a consequence of the Pandemic. Testing times In the current climate, it is unfortunately all too possible to imagine a business that has dealt with a severe business interruption by following the government’s advice and has: • lowered variable costs (while participating in the COVID-19 Wage Subsidy Scheme); • delayed discretionary spending on replacing or improving Richard Ambery assets, new projects and research and development; Consultant, Capital Markets DD: + 353 (0)1 673 1003 [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Contracting out of Secondary Insolvency Proceedings: the Main Liquidator's Undertaking in the Meaning of Article 18 In
    Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law Volume 9 | Issue 1 Article 12 2014 Contracting Out of Secondary Insolvency Proceedings: The ainM Liquidator's Undertaking in the Meaning of Article 18 in the Proposal to Amend the EU Insolvency Regulation Bob Wessels Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjcfcl Recommended Citation Bob Wessels, Contracting Out of Secondary Insolvency Proceedings: The Main Liquidator's Undertaking in the Meaning of Article 18 in the Proposal to Amend the EU Insolvency Regulation, 9 Brook. J. Corp. Fin. & Com. L. (2014). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjcfcl/vol9/iss1/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. CONTRACTING OUT OF SECONDARY INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS: THE MAIN LIQUIDATOR’S UNDERTAKING IN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 18 IN THE PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE EU INSOLVENCY REGULATION Prof. Dr. Bob Wessels* INTRODUCTIOn The European Insolvency Regulation1 aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of insolvency proceedings having cross-border effects within the European Union. For that purpose, the Insolvency Regulation lays down rules on jurisdiction common to all member states of the European Union (Member States), rules to facilitate recognition of insolvency judgments, and rules regarding the applicable law. The model of the Regulation will be known. It allows for one main proceeding, opened in one Member State, with the possibility of opening secondary proceedings in other EU Member States. The procedural model can only be successful if these proceedings are coordinated: Main insolvency proceedings and secondary proceedings can…contribute to the effective realization of the total assets only if all the concurrent proceedings pending are coordinated.
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19: Managing Financial Difficulties in the United Arab Emirates
    Latham & Watkins Restructuring & Special Situations Practice 24 March 2020 | Number 2644 Please visit Latham’s COVID-19 Resources for additional Client Alerts and resources to respond to COVID-19-related business and legal issues. COVID-19: Managing Financial Difficulties in the United Arab Emirates Understanding bankruptcy laws in the UAE and DIFC in the context of COVID-19-related financial pressures. COVID-19 has already caused wide-scale disruption to numerous industries both locally and globally. Whilst efforts are underway to stop the spread and impact of COVID-19, the financial and social impact of the virus will be felt for many months to come. As companies come to terms with working from home arrangements and the new landscape in which they operate, some business inevitably will experience financial difficulties (be it short term or longer term). Governments are releasing stimulus packages which will, no doubt, go some way to assuage some of the impact but given the global impact of the virus it is likely that some businesses will face difficult decisions. Directors of companies should seek legal advice as soon as possible to plan their response to any financial difficulties. Not only will seeking legal advice allow directors to take advantage of the many options available to them under United Arab Emirates (UAE), Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) and, where applicable, international law, but also to understand their own position in their capacity as directors — for example, the UAE Bankruptcy Law imposes a number of offences and penalties that may apply to directors and these penalties can lead to up to five years imprisonment, fines of up to AED1 million and disqualification from being able to act as a director.
    [Show full text]