Source: http://www.walshtaylor.co.uk/insolvency-practitioner-code-of-ethics/
Timestamp: 2017-11-21 17:23:25
Document Index: 788975005

Matched Legal Cases: ['ART 1', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3']

Insolvency Practitioner Code of Ethics | Walsh Taylor
Home » Insolvency Practitioner Code of Ethics
A word document copy can be downloaded at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/insolvency-practitioner-code-of-ethics
PART 1 GENERAL APPLICATION OF THE CODE
1-3 Introduction 3
4 Fundamental Principles 3
5-6 Framework Approach 3
7-16 Identification of Threats to the Fundamental Principles 4
17-18 Evaluation of Threats 5
19 Possible Safeguards 6
20-30 Insolvency Appointments 7
31-32 Conflicts of Interest 8
33-34 Practice Mergers 9
35-36 Transparency 9
37-39 Professional Competence and Due Care 9
40-48 Section A: Professional and Personal Relationships 11
49-52 Section B: Dealing with the Assets of a Company 13
53-56 Section C: Obtaining Specialist Advice and Services 14
57-62 Section D: Fees and Other Types of Remuneration 15
63-69 Section E: Obtaining Insolvency Appointments 16
70-73 Section F: Gifts and Hospitality 17
74-75 Section G: Record Keeping 18
76-77 Section H: The Application of the Framework to Specific
Situations 19
78-80 Part 1 – examples that do not relate to a previous or
existing insolvency appointment 19
81-86 Part 2 – examples relating to previous or existing insolvency
87-88 Part 3 – examples in respect of cases conducted under
Scottish Law 21
Close or immediate family
A spouse (or equivalent), dependant, parent, child or sibling.
(a) which, under the terms of legislation must be undertaken by an Insolvency Practitioner; or
(b) as a nominee or supervisor of a voluntary arrangement.
Practice The organisation in which the Insolvency Practitioner practises.
(a) which is a company: a director;
(b) which is a partnership: a partner;
(c) which is a limited liability partnership: a member;
(d) which is comprised of a sole practitioner: that person;
This Code applies to all Insolvency Practitioners. Insolvency Practitioners should take steps to ensure that the Code is applied in all professional work relating to an insolvency appointment, and to any professional work that may lead to such an insolvency appointment. Although, an insolvency appointment will be of the Insolvency Practitioner personally rather than his practice he should ensure that the standards set out in this Code are applied to all members of the insolvency team.
It is this Code, and the spirit that underlies it, that governs the conduct of Insolvency Practitioners
An Insolvency Practitioner is required to comply with the following fundamental principles:
The framework approach is a method which Insolvency Practitioners can use to identify actual or potential threats to the fundamental principles and determine whether there are any safeguards that might be available to offset them. The framework approach requires an Insolvency Practitioner to:
Throughout this Code there are examples of threats and possible safeguards. These examples are illustrative and should not be considered as exhaustive lists of all relevant threats or safeguards. It is impossible to define every situation that creates a threat to compliance with the fundamental principles or to specify the safeguards that may be available.
An Insolvency Practitioner should take reasonable steps to identify the existence of any threats to compliance with the fundamental principles which arise during the course of his professional work.
An Insolvency Practitioner should take particular care to identify the existence of threats which exist prior to or at the time of taking an insolvency appointment or which, at that stage, it may reasonably be expected might arise during the course of such an insolvency appointment. Paragraphs 20 to 48 below contain particular factors an Insolvency Practitioner should take into account when deciding whether to accept an insolvency appointment.
In identifying the existence of any threats, an Insolvency Practitioner should have regard to relationships whereby the practice is held out as being part of a national or an international association.
Many threats fall into one or more of five categories:
The following paragraphs give examples of the possible threats that an Insolvency Practitioner may face.
Examples of circumstances that may create self-interest threats for an Insolvency Practitioner include:
Examples of circumstances that may create self-review threats include:
Examples of circumstances that may create advocacy threats include:
(a) Acting in an advisory capacity for a creditor of an entity.
(b) Acting as an advocate for a client in litigation or dispute with an entity.
Examples of circumstances that may create familiarity threats include:
An individual within the practice having a close relationship with a potential purchaser of an insolvent’s assets and/or business.
Examples of circumstances that may create intimidation threats include:
The threat of dismissal or replacement being used to :
Exert influence over an insolvency appointment where the Insolvency Practitioner is an employee rather than a principal of the
The threat of a complaint being made to the Insolvency Practitioner’s authorising body.
An Insolvency Practitioner should take reasonable steps to evaluate any threats to compliance with the fundamental principles that he has identified.
In particular, an Insolvency Practitioner should consider what a reasonable and informed third party, having knowledge of all relevant information, including the significance of the threat, would conclude to be acceptable.
Having identified and evaluated a threat to the fundamental principles an Insolvency Practitioner should consider whether there any safeguards that may be available to reduce the threat to an acceptable level. The relevant safeguards will vary depending on the circumstances. Generally safeguards fall into two broad categories. Firstly, safeguards created by the profession, legislation or regulation. Secondly, safeguards in the work environment. In the insolvency context safeguards in the work environment can include safeguards specific to an insolvency appointment. These are considered in paragraphs 20 to 39 below. In addition, safeguards can be introduced across the practice. These safeguards seek to create a work environment in which threats are identified and the introduction of appropriate safeguards is encouraged. Some examples include:
Timely communication of a practice’s policies and procedures, including any changes to them, to all individuals within the practice, and appropriate training and education on such policies and procedures.
The practice of insolvency is principally governed by statute and secondary legislation and in many cases is subject ultimately to the control of the Court. Where circumstances are dealt with by statute or secondary legislation, an Insolvency Practitioner must comply with such provisions. An Insolvency Practitioner must also comply with any relevant judicial authority relating to his conduct and any directions given by the Court.
An Insolvency Practitioner should act in a manner appropriate to his position as an officer of the Court (where applicable) and in accordance with any quasi-judicial, fiduciary or other duties that he may be under.
Before agreeing to accept any insolvency appointment (including a joint appointment), an Insolvency Practitioner should consider whether acceptance would create any threats to compliance with the fundamental principles. Of particular importance will be any threats to the fundamental principle of objectivity created by conflicts of interest or by any significant professional or personal relationships. These are considered in more detail below.
In considering whether objectivity or integrity may be threatened, an Insolvency Practitioner should identify and evaluate any professional or personal relationship (see section A below) which may affect compliance with the fundamental principles. The appropriate response to the threats arising from any such relationships should then be considered, together with the introduction of any possible safeguards.
Generally, it will be inappropriate for an Insolvency Practitioner to accept an insolvency appointment where a threat to the fundamental principles exists or may reasonably be expected might arise during the course of the insolvency appointment unless:
The following safeguards may be considered:
As regards joint appointments, where an Insolvency Practitioner is specifically precluded by this Code from accepting an insolvency appointment as an individual, a joint appointment will not be an appropriate safeguard and will not make accepting the insolvency appointment
In deciding whether to take an insolvency appointment in circumstances where a threat to the fundamental principles has been identified, the Insolvency Practitioner should consider whether the interests of those on whose behalf he would be appointed to act would best be served by the appointment of another Insolvency Practitioner who did not face the same threat and, if so, whether any such appropriately qualified and experienced other Insolvency Practitioner is likely to be available to be appointed.
An Insolvency Practitioner will encounter situations where no safeguards can reduce a threat to an acceptable level. Where this is the case, an Insolvency Practitioner should conclude that it is not appropriate to accept an insolvency appointment.
Following acceptance, any threats should continue to be kept under appropriate review and an Insolvency Practitioner should be mindful that other threats may come to light or arise. There may be occasions when the Insolvency Practitioner is no longer in compliance with this Code because of changed circumstances or something which has been inadvertently overlooked. This would generally not be an issue provided the Insolvency Practitioner has appropriate quality control policies and procedures in place to deal with such matters and, once discovered, the matter is corrected promptly and any necessary safeguards are applied. In deciding whether to continue an insolvency appointment the Insolvency Practitioner may take into account the wishes of the creditors, who after full disclosure has been made have the right to retain or replace the Insolvency Practitioner.
In all cases an Insolvency Practitioner will need to exercise his judgment to determine how best to deal with an identified threat. In exercising his judgment, an Insolvency Practitioner should consider what a reasonable and informed third party, having knowledge of all relevant information, including the significance of the threat and the safeguards applied, would conclude to be acceptable. This consideration will be affected by matters such as the significance of the threat, the nature of the work and the structure of the practice.
An Insolvency Practitioner should take reasonable steps to identify circumstances that could pose a conflict of interest. Such circumstances may give rise to threats to compliance with the fundamental principles. Examples of where a conflict of interest may arise are where:
There are a succession of or sequential insolvency appointments (see section H).
A significant relationship has existed with the entity or someone connected with the entity (see also section A)
Some of the safeguards listed at paragraph 25 may be applied to reduce the threats created by a conflict of interest to an acceptable level. Where a conflict of interest arises, the preservation of confidentiality will be of paramount importance; therefore, the safeguards used should generally include the use of effective information barriers.
Where practices merge, they should subsequently be treated as one for the purposes of assessing threats to the fundamental principles. At the time of the merger, existing insolvency appointments should be reviewed and any threats identified. Principals and employees of the merged practice become subject to common ethical constraints in relation to accepting new insolvency appointments to clients of either of the former practices. However existing insolvency appointments which are rendered in apparent breach of the Code by such a merger need not be determined automatically, provided that a considered review of the situation by the practice discloses no obvious and immediate ethical conflict.
Where an individual within the practice has, in any former practice, undertaken work upon the affairs of an entity in a capacity that is incompatible with an insolvency appointment of the new practice, the individual should not work or be employed on that assignment.
Both before and during an insolvency appointment an Insolvency Practitioner may acquire personal information that is not directly relevant to the insolvency or confidential commercial information relating to the affairs of third parties. The information may be such that others might expect that confidentiality would be maintained.
Nevertheless an Insolvency Practitioner in the role as office holder has a professional duty to report openly to those with an interest in the outcome of the insolvency. An Insolvency Practitioner should always report on his acts and dealings as fully as possible given the circumstances of the case, in a way that is transparent and understandable. An Insolvency Practitioner should bear in mind the expectations of others and what a reasonable and informed third party would consider appropriate.
Prior to accepting an insolvency appointment the Insolvency Practitioner should ensure that he is satisfied that the following matters have been considered:
Acquiring an appropriate understanding of the nature of the entity’s business, the complexity of its operations, the specific requirements of the engagement and the purpose, nature and scope of the work to be performed.
The fundamental principle of professional competence and due care requires that an Insolvency Practitioner should only accept an insolvency appointment when the Insolvency Practitioner has sufficient expertise. For example, a self interest threat to the fundamental principle of professional competence and due care is created if the Insolvency Practitioner or the insolvency team does not possess or cannot acquire the competencies necessary to carry out the insolvency appointment. Expertise will include appropriate training, technical knowledge, knowledge of the entity and the business with which the entity is concerned.
Maintaining and acquiring professional competence requires a continuing awareness and understanding of relevant technical and professional developments, including:
The environment in which Insolvency Practitioners work and the relationships formed in their professional and personal lives can lead to threats to the fundamental principle of objectivity.
In particular, the principle of objectivity may be threatened if any individual within the practice, the close or immediate family of an individual within the practice or the practice itself, has or has had a professional or personal relationship which relates to the insolvency appointment being considered.
Professional or personal relationships may include (but are not restricted to) relationships with:-
any director or shadow director or former director or shadow director of the entity;
shareholders of the entity;
any principal or employee of the entity;
business partners of the entity;
companies or entities controlled by the entity;
creditors (including debenture holders) of the entity;
debtors of the entity;
close or immediate family of the entity(if an individual) or its officers (if a corporate body);
others with commercial relationships with the practice
Safeguards within the practice should include policies and procedures to identify relationships between individuals within the practice and third parties in a way that is proportionate and reasonable in relation to the insolvency appointment being considered.
Where a professional or personal relationship of the type described in paragraph 41 has been identified the Insolvency Practitioner should evaluate the impact of the relationship in the context of the insolvency appointment being sought or considered. Issues to consider in evaluating whether a relationship creates a threat to the fundamental principles may include the following:
Whether the insolvency appointment being considered involves consideration of any work previously undertaken by the practice for that
The nature of any personal relationship and the proximity of the Insolvency Practitioner to the individual with whom the relationship exists and, where appropriate, the proximity of that individual to the entity in relation to which the insolvency appointment
The extent of the insolvency team’s familiarity with the individuals connected with the
Having identified and evaluated a relationship that may create a threat to the fundamental principles, the Insolvency Practitioner should consider his response including the introduction of any possible safeguards to reduce the threat to an acceptable level.
Some of the safeguards which may be considered to reduce the threat created by a professional or personal relationship to an acceptable level are considered in paragraph 25. Other safeguards may include:
An Insolvency Practitioner may encounter situations in which no or no reasonable safeguards can be introduced to eliminate a threat arising from a professional or personal relationship, or to reduce it to an acceptable level. In such situations, the relationship in question will constitute a significant professional relationship (“Significant Professional Relationship”) or a significant personal relationship (“Significant Personal Relationship”). Where this is case the Insolvency Practitioner should conclude that it is not appropriate to take the insolvency appointment.
Consideration should always be given to the perception of others when deciding whether to accept an insolvency appointment. Whilst an Insolvency Practitioner may regard a relationship as not being significant to the insolvency appointment, the perception of others may differ and this may in some circumstances be sufficient to make the relationship significant.
Actual or perceived threats (for example self interest threats) to the fundamental principles may arise when during an insolvency appointment, an Insolvency Practitioner realises assets.
Save in circumstances which clearly do not impair the Insolvency Practitioner’s objectivity, Insolvency Practitioners appointed to any insolvency appointment in relation to an entity, should not themselves acquire, directly or indirectly, any of the assets of an entity, nor knowingly permit any individual within the practice, or any close or immediate family member of the Insolvency Practitioner or of an individual within the practice, directly or indirectly, to do so.
Where the assets and business of an insolvent company are sold by an Insolvency Practitioner shortly after appointment on pre-agreed terms, this could lead to an actual or perceived threat to objectivity. The sale may also be seen as a threat to objectivity by creditors or others not involved in the prior agreement. The threat to objectivity may be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level by safeguards such as obtaining an independent valuation of the assets or business being sold, or the consideration of other potential purchasers.
It is also particularly important for an Insolvency Practitioner to take care to ensure (where to do so does not conflict with any legal or professional obligation) that his decision making processes are transparent, understandable and readily identifiable to all third parties who may be affected by the sale or proposed sale.
When an Insolvency Practitioner intends to rely on the advice or work of another, the Insolvency Practitioner should evaluate whether such reliance is warranted. The Insolvency Practitioner should consider factors such as reputation, expertise, resources available and applicable professional and ethical standards. Any payment to the third party should reflect the value of the work undertaken.
Threats to the fundamental principles (for example familiarity threats and self interest threats) can arise if services are provided by a regular source independent of the practice.
Safeguards should be introduced to reduce such threats to an acceptable level. These safeguards should ensure that a proper business relationship is maintained between the parties and that such relationships are reviewed periodically to ensure that best value and service is being obtained in relation to each insolvency appointment. Additional safeguards may include clear guidelines and policies within the practice on such relationships. An Insolvency Practitioner should also consider disclosure of the existence of such business relationships to the general body of creditors or the creditor’s committee if one exists.
Threats to the fundamental principles can also arise where services are provided from within the practice or by a party with whom the practice, or an individual within the practice, has a business or personal relationship. An Insolvency Practitioner should take particular care in such circumstances to ensure that the best value and service is being provided.
Where an engagement may lead to an insolvency appointment, an Insolvency Practitioner should make any party to the work aware of the terms of the work and, in particular, the basis on which any fees are charged and which services are covered by those fees.
Where an engagement may lead to an insolvency appointment, Insolvency Practitioners should not accept referral fees or commissions unless they have established safeguards to reduce the threats created by such fees or commissions to an acceptable level.
Safeguards may include disclosure in advance of any arrangements. If after receiving any such payments, an Insolvency Practitioner accepts an insolvency appointment, the amount and source of any fees or commissions received should be disclosed to creditors.
During an insolvency appointment, accepting referral fees or commissions represents a significant threat to objectivity. Such fees or commissions should not therefore be accepted other than where to do so is for the benefit of the insolvent estate.
If such fees or commissions are accepted they should only be accepted for the benefit of the estate; not for the benefit of the Insolvency Practitioner or the practice.
Further, where such fees or commissions are accepted an Insolvency Practitioner should consider making disclosure to creditors.
The special nature of insolvency appointments makes the payment or offer of any commission for or the furnishing of any valuable consideration towards, the introduction of insolvency appointments This does not, however, preclude an arrangement between an Insolvency Practitioner and an employee whereby the employee’s remuneration is based in whole or in part on introductions obtained for the Insolvency Practitioner through the efforts of the employee.
When an Insolvency Practitioner seeks an insolvency appointment or work that may lead to an insolvency appointment through advertising or other forms of marketing, there may be threats to compliance with the fundamental principles.
When considering whether to accept an insolvency appointment an Insolvency Practitioner should satisfy himself that any advertising or other form of marketing pursuant to which the insolvency appointment may have been obtained is or has been:
(c) Complies with relevant codes of practice and guidance in relation to advertising.
Advertisements and other forms of marketing should be clearly distinguishable as such and be legal, decent, honest and truthful.
If reference is made in advertisements or other forms of marketing to fees or to the cost of the services to be provided, the basis of calculation and the range of services that the reference is intended to cover should be provided. Care should be taken to ensure that such references do not mislead as to the precise range of services and the time commitment that the reference is intended to cover.
An Insolvency Practitioner should never promote or seek to promote his services, or the services of another Insolvency Practitioner, in such a way, or to such an extent as to amount to harassment.
Where an Insolvency Practitioner or the practice advertises for work via a third party, the Insolvency Practitioner is responsible for ensuring that the third party follows the above guidance.
An Insolvency Practitioner, or a close or immediate family member, may be offered gifts and hospitality. In relation to an insolvency appointment, such an offer will give rise to threats to compliance with the fundamental principles. For example, self-interest threats may arise if a gift is accepted and intimidation threats may arise from the possibility of such offers being made public.
The significance of such threats will depend on the nature, value and intent behind the offer. In deciding whether to accept any offer of a gift or hospitality the Insolvency Practitioner should have regard to what a reasonable and informed third party having knowledge of all relevant information would consider to be appropriate. Where such a reasonable and informed third party would consider the gift to be made in the normal course of business without the specific intent to influence decision making or obtain information the Insolvency Practitioner may generally conclude that there is no significant threat to compliance with the fundamental principles.
Where appropriate, safeguards should be considered and applied as necessary to eliminate any threats to the fundamental principles or reduce them to an acceptable level. If an Insolvency Practitioner encounters a situation in which no or no reasonable safeguards can be introduced to reduce a threat arising from offers of gifts or hospitality to an acceptable level he should conclude that it is not appropriate to accept the offer.
An Insolvency Practitioner should also not offer or provide gifts or hospitality where this would give rise to an unacceptable threat to compliance with the fundamental principles.
It will always be for the Insolvency Practitioner to justify his actions. An Insolvency Practitioner will be expected to be able to demonstrate the steps that he took and the conclusions that he reached in identifying, evaluating and responding to any threats, both leading up to and during an insolvency appointment, by reference to written contemporaneous records.
The records an Insolvency Practitioner maintains, in relation to the steps that he took and the conclusions that he reached, should be sufficient to enable a reasonable and informed third party to reach a view on the appropriateness of his actions.
The following examples describe specific circumstances and relationships that will create threats to compliance with the fundamental principles. The examples may assist an Insolvency Practitioner and the members of the insolvency team to assess the implications of similar, but different, circumstances and relationships.
The examples are divided into three parts. Part 1 contains examples which do not relate to a previous or existing insolvency appointment. Part 2 contains examples that do relate to a previous or existing insolvency appointment. Part 3 contains some examples under Scottish law. The examples are not intended to be exhaustive.
Part 1 – Examples that do not relate to a previous or existing insolvency appointment
The following situations involve a professional relationship which does not consist of a previous insolvency appointment:
Insolvency appointment following audit related work
This restriction does not apply where the insolvency appointment is in a members’ voluntary liquidation; an Insolvency Practitioner may normally take an appointment as liquidator. However, the Insolvency Practitioner should consider whether there are any other circumstances that give rise to an unacceptable threat to compliance with the fundamental principles. Further, the Insolvency Practitioner should satisfy himself that the directors’ declaration of solvency is likely to be substantiated by events.
Appointment as Investigating Accountant at the instigation of a creditor
(a) there has not been a direct involvement by an individual within the practice in the management of the entity; and
(b) the practice had its principal client relationship with the creditor or other party, rather than with the company or proprietor of the business; and
(c) the entity was aware of this.
Part 2 – Examples relating to previous or existing insolvency appointments
The following situations involve a prior professional relationship that involves a previous or existing insolvency appointment:-
Insolvency appointment following an appointment as Administrative or other Receiver
Administration or Liquidation following appointment as Supervisor of a Voluntary Arrangement
Proposed appointment: Administrator or liquidator.
Liquidation following appointment as Administrator
Conversion of Members’ Voluntary Liquation into Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation
Bankruptcy following appointment as Supervisor of an Individual Voluntary Arrangement
Part 3 – Examples in respect of cases conducted under Scottish Law
Sequestration following appointment as Trustee under a Trust Deed for creditors
Sequestration where the Accountant in Bankruptcy is Trustee following appointment as Trustee under a Trust Deed for creditors
Low wage growth despite high employment levels