Supporting businesses in uncertain times – temporary changes to corporate laws

The Government recently announced further measures to help companies facing financial difficulties as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and NZ’s current Level 4 status. Temporary changes will be made to the Companies Act 1993 (the Act).

Supporting businesses in uncertain times – temporary changes to corporate lawsSupporting businesses in uncertain times – temporary changes to corporate laws
Category
| General
|
General
Published Date
14
April 2020
Reading Time

The Government recently announced further measures to help companies facing financial difficulties as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and NZ’s current Level 4 status. Temporary changes will be made to the Companies Act 1993 (the Act). The most significant of these changes are to provide company directors with a “safe harbour” from their “insolvency duties” and giving companies the opportunity to place their existing debts into “hibernation” for up to six months.    

Safe harbours

The Act places a number of general duties on directors of companies, and these duties generally apply throughout a company’s life cycle. What are often referred to as “insolvency duties” are the duties that a director must not:

(a) agree to, cause or allow the company’s business to be carried on in a manner likely to create a substantial risk of serious loss to that company’s creditors (section 135); or

(b) agree to the company incurring an obligation unless the director believes on reasonable grounds that the company will be able to perform the obligation (section 136).

Under the proposed “safe harbour” regime, directors of businesses facing insolvency due to COVID-19 may be able to make decisions to keep on trading, and to take on new obligations, without being in breach of their duties mentioned above. The “safe harbour” regime is likely to have conditions that must be met before directors can rely on it.  Early indications from the Government are that the conditions will include the following:

  1. in the good faith opinion of the directors, that the company is facing or likely to face significant liquidity problems in the next six months as a result of the impact of COVID-19 on them or their creditors;
  2. the company was able to pay its debts as they fall due on 31 December 2019; and
  3. the directors consider in good faith that it is more likely than not that the company will be able to pay its debts as they fall due within 18 months (for example, because trading conditions are likely to improve, or they are likely to able to reach an accommodation with their creditors).

The interim relief to the insolvency related directors’ duties is still to be agreed by Parliament.  However, if agreed, it is likely that the safe harbour protection will be backdated to Friday, 3 April.  

In the meantime, directors should keep in mind:

  1. the safe harbour regime will only apply if liquidity issues have arisen due to the COVID-19 pandemic (for example, significantly reduced or no revenue due to no longer being able to trade) – if a company has liquidity issues due to other factors or has doubtful solvency (for example, value of assets is close to the value of liabilities) then the safe harbour may not be available;
  2. other director duties will still continue to apply, particularly, obligations to act in good faith and in the best interests of a company (section 131), and exercise reasonable care, diligence and skill (section 137) and directors will need to comply with such duties;
  3. there is no difference in the duties of directors who live in New Zealand (or Australia as an enforcement country) compared with directors who live overseas (but are directors of NZ companies), nor is there any difference in the duties of those directors who are considered to be executive, non-executive or independent directors; and
  4. “insolvency duties” as they currently stand (i.e. without the proposed amendments) do not prohibit directors from taking reasonable business risks.  So, when a company is in financial difficulty, the duties do not necessarily require directors to stop trading or take steps to liquidate that company.  Directors of companies should always be considering and assessing a matrix of financial factors, including company’s cashflow, outstanding debtors (especially for doubtful or bad debts), reliance on key customers and suppliers’ and their solvency, and the ability to pay employees, creditors and other debts owed.  This may be useful for directors to keep in mind if they are unable to come without the conditions of the safe harbour.

We are pleased that NZ is taking steps to suspend laws relating to directors’ duties, similar to what has already been done in Australia and the UK.  We hope the proposed changes will strike the right balance between the interests of directors and creditors, and provide some certainty for all in these uncertain times.

Business Debt Hibernation regime

Another one of the temporary changes to the Act is the proposed new "business debt hibernation" (BDH) regime which will also be available to businesses with COVID-19 related liquidity issues.  

The Government has only outlined a skeleton of the proposal, but at this stage the BDH regime is looking like this:

  1. directors who meet a threshold (yet to be determined) will be able put a proposal to their creditors to put their "business into hibernation".  We anticipate that the threshold will be similar to that for the “safe harbour” regime (for example, that the company is facing or likely to face significant liquidity problems in the next six months as a result of the impact of COVID-19 on them or their creditors);
  2. the creditors will be given notice, and will have a month to consider, the BDH proposal.  It seems likely that there will be a minimum amount of information that must be provided to creditors to support any proposal.  However, what information will be required and whether creditors will have the opportunity to meet and/or ask any questions directly to the company is presumably still being worked through;
  3. at least 50% of creditors will need to agree to the company being placed into BDH.  The 50% creditor threshold will be based on both the value and the number of creditors.  We assume that employees will not be considered in the 50% threshold (on the basis that any accepted proposal will not be binding on employees so presumably they would also not be able to vote) – again this is still to be confirmed;
  4. the creditors may be able to negotiate conditions into the BDH proposal;
  5. if agreed to, the proposal will be binding on all creditors (not just those who agreed).  Employees are exempt;
  6. while a business is in BDH it would be able to continue to trade, subject to any restrictions agreed with creditors;
  7. creditors will not be able to enforce debts during the month-long period they are considering the proposal and if the proposal is agreed to, for another six months as well, so the “BDH” regime may apply to a company for seven months;
  8. the voidable transaction regime (where transactions can be unwound by a liquidator if the company ends up in liquidation) will not apply, so unrelated third-party creditors who receive payments from a company in “hibernation” cannot be required to repay monies received (subject to certain conditions being met).  

The Government’s intention for the BDH regime is for it to be a straight-forward, flexible and relatively quick way for companies and creditors to agree about non-payment of debts and hopefully, “buy” directors some time to formulate debt repayment plans.  

We look forward to seeing what the final form of the regime looks like, although we are confident that the assumptions noted above are currently being considered and worked through. Hopefully this new, but temporary, addition to the Act will give COVID-19 affected businesses the opportunity to trade through these unprecedented times, but ultimately still ensure that creditors get paid.  

Additional changes

Additional changes to the Companies Act and other legislation to support businesses:

  1. Electronic signatures can be used for security agreements containing powers of attorney (amendments required to Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017);
  2. Allowing companies to use electronic communications even if their Constitution does not permit such use;
  3. Excusing non-compliance with a company's Constitution due to the impact of COVID-19;
  4. Bringing in changes to the voidable transactions regime that reduces the vulnerable period from two years to six months, provided the debtor company and creditor are not related parties;
  5. Registrars will have temporary powers to relax deadlines under various legislation, including timing for holding an annual general meeting and filing annual returns by companies; and
  6. Registrars will have temporary powers to relax deadlines that they need to work to, for example, processing applications to reserve company names.

End note

These changes still need to be agreed by Parliament, so the likely date that these all changes will become law is not yet known

We will be keeping a close eye on the implementation of the “safe harbour” and “business hibernation” regimes, as well as the other changes mentioned, and will provide updates once further details are made known.  In the interim, please get in touch with us for a chat if you want to discuss these changes or anything else affecting your business.  

Stay home and stay safe – we are all in this together.

Services in this insight

There are no services for this current insight. Take a look at our services page for more information on our different offerings.

Services in this insight

There are no services for this current insight. Take a look at our services page for more information on our different offerings.

Services in this insight

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore.

There are no services for this current insight. Take a look at our services page for more information on our different offerings.
Previous Article
Next Article

Consultation opens on New Zealand's payment services regulation

Modern slavery regulation on the way – Is your business ready?

From Hertzian waves to hyperlinks – What the BSA’s online decision means for your business

Space Law in New Zealand — Signals from the ground

Cyber security changes flagged for New Zealand

The four Cs of successful fintech partnerships

New rule 3A introduced to the Biometric Processing Privacy Code

IPP3A is nearly in force – What agencies need to know

OPC shifts public enquiries online – What agencies should do now

AI as a confidante? Legal privilege and the ever-increasing use of AI

New Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code – What you need to know

Building blocks of trade mark law: New Zealand approach to "use as a trade mark" now compatible with Australia

Consumer law update 2025

Open banking launches in New Zealand

Is fair something to fear? The Government announces beefed-up Fair Trading Act

Is it fair? Lessons from Bartz v Anthropic and Kadrey v Meta

Open banking almost live

Why New Zealand businesses should care about the EU Data Act

Product labelling changes flagged for New Zealand

Biometric Processing Privacy Code 2025 introduced to New Zealand

Open banking regulations released for consultation

Ten tips for buy-side M&A success

A recipe for disaster – Is caramel a copyright work?

Becoming a Globally Renowned Fintech Nation (and how regulation can light the path)

Important changes made to the Privacy Act

New Zealand may ban social media for young users

Customer and Product Data Act update – Open banking officially on the way

Tips from the trenches – Your AI policy cheat sheet

Significant regulatory reform proposed for New Zealand media

Security guidance released for emerging tech companies

Customer and Product Data Bill – Select Committee reports back

Consumer law update 2024

New Zealand’s Artist Resale Royalty is ready to go

The shape of coffee – “Moccona” vs “Vittoria”

New Zealand’s Copyright Act gets a sense of humour

WIPO’s traditional knowledge treaty is adopted

Doing business in the Middle East

AI and advertising – What producers need to know

Seven contract clauses every freelancer needs

Baby Reindeer – When truth is stranger than fiction?

Our comments on the Biometric Processing Privacy Code

Therapeutic Products Act to be repealed this year

Is End-to-End to end?

Geographical indications – Changes uncorked by the EU-NZ Fair Trade Agreement

Lawyers and Generative AI – New NZ Law Society guidance released

Facing the future – A biometrics code of practice for New Zealand?

Deepfakes and style mimicking – Should New Zealand adopt a right of publicity?

Five Eyes release the Five Principles to Secure Innovation

The copyright conundrum with generative AI

Innovate at the speed of trust – Privacy Commissioner releases new guidance on artificial intelligence tools

Political advertising on social media: sludge or copyright quagmire?

Privacy Amendment Bill introduced to Parliament

New Data Privacy Framework: Meta gets a lifeline

The long and winding road to royalties

Implications of the Supreme Court’s “new debt” approach in Mainzeal

EU gets closer to AI laws

UK Supreme Court puts Quincecare ‘duty’ back in its box

A Deep Dive into The Customer and Product Data Bill

Searching for a shield: Meta’s €1.2 billion fine and international transfers in the age of Big Data

New NZ-UK Free Trade Agreement signals tech, media and IP law changes

Ditch the fax! Tips for building a tech-savvy law firm

The Incorporated Societies Act 2022 – what you need to know for your society

Common myths about copyright online

Artificial artist, or artificial plagiarist?

Big boost to gaming

Is your product “AI powered”?

The latest on New Zealand’s Consumer Data Right

Space Law in New Zealand

You Cannot Defame the Dead or Can You? Tikanga Māori and NZ Defamation Law

Open Banking is coming – through the Consumer Data Right

Massive SEC Fines for Companies Using Text and Instant Messaging

One Act to Rule Them All

A Legal Guide to Kicking SaaS

Potential changes to the Privacy Act 2020

NZ's Social Media "Code of Practice" Launched

Are you being unfair?

A new Companies Office levy is one step closer

Has Paramount Pictures gone maverick?

From Russia with love: The ‘other’ Russian conflict targeting intellectual property owners

Retail Payment System Act 2022 now in force

Paying the price for getting privacy wrong

Can AI be an inventor?

Finfluencer Crackdown

TIN Fintech Insights Report Launch

Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'

Disclosure of personal information - how to, not don't do

The Spice May Flow, But The Copyright Doesn’t

Sound Recording Ownership (Taylor's Version)

The Lowdown (and Lockdown) on Summer Clerkships

Building Blocks of Trust

Firm News | Legal Rankings

Buy Now, Regulate Soon

Ten simple things

Funding the Future

Cyber Security for Start-ups

Fit for purchase

The Screen Industry Workers Bill

Other articles you
might like

Modern slavery regulation on the way – Is your business ready?
6
May 2026

New modern slavery legislation is progressing through Parliament and is now open for public consultation.

Luiz Buck

Luiz Buck

Senior Associate

Space Law in New Zealand — Signals from the ground
28
April 2026

Hudson Gavin Martin was delighted to once again author the New Zealand chapter of Lexology In Depth: Space Law.

Lisa Paz

Lisa Paz

Senior Associate

Cyber security changes flagged for New Zealand
13
April 2026

The Government’s new Cyber Security Strategy 2026–2030 and Action Plan 2026–2027 signal a renewed push to strengthen New Zealand’s resilience to digital threats.

Luiz Buck

Luiz Buck

Senior Associate

Simon Martin

Simon Martin

Partner