Directors' duties to prevent insolvent trading in a crisis: Responses to COVID‐19 in Australia and lessons from Germany

Abstract

This article considers relief from directors' duties to avoid trading whilst insolvent during the COVID‐19 pandemic in Australia and Germany. Comparative insolvency law literature traditionally compares Australia to jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom and New Zealand. However, Germany has a track record of using insolvency law to manage social and economic crises. The German approach suggests solutions to critical issues not dealt with in the Australian safe harbour legislation, such as the failure to suspend other statutory duties to provide clear guidance to directors on the balancing of various interests, and the treatment of potential voidable transactions and new monies (i.e., new funding or credit). The responses in both jurisdictions suggest a change in priorities away from creditor protection, a key raison d'être for these types of duties, during a crisis. Similar to the German approach of turning the obligation to file for formal insolvency proceedings off and on, the further safe harbour adopted in Australia as part of a new restructuring procedure for small businesses, which commenced on January 1, 2021, suggests that the use of safe harbours could become a permanent crisis‐management tool in Australia too, with potential consequences for the balance between debtor and creditor interests.