Home

On 9 July 2026, the AFA's Sanctions Commission took an unprecedented step by imposing its first direct financial penalties on a company and its director, for failure to comply with their obligations to prevent and detect corruption, pursuant to Article 17 of the Sapin II Act (decision no. 25-01, Société V. and M. S.).

For years, fire and rehire has been unpopular but lawful. An employer who wanted to change pay, hours or other terms could dismiss an employee who refused and offer a new contract, provided it was a reasonable decision. From January 2027, that option all but disappears. The Employment Rights Act 2025 makes many fire and rehire dismissals automatically unfair as a day one right, removes the compensation cap, and increases penalties for failing to inform and consult. This makes the financial exposure effectively unlimited.

UK universities are facing mounting financial pressures from rising costs, constrained domestic tuition fee income and increased regulatory demands. As concerns about the sector's financial sustainability grow, questions are increasingly being asked about what would happen if a university became insolvent and whether the current legal and regulatory framework could manage such an outcome in an orderly way. In this three-part series, Richard Obank, Partner in BCLP's Restructuring & Insolvency practice, explores the challenges posed by a potential university failure, the limitations of the existing insolvency framework, and the lessons that higher education might draw from other regulated sectors.  Part 1 examines why university failure is no longer a theoretical concern, the consequences for students and other stakeholders, and the fragmented insolvency options available to institutions with different legal forms. It sets the context for the central question running through this series: is the present framework capable of delivering an orderly outcome if a university fails?