The court considered the case of Glenister and similar and said: ‘I accept the submission that these cases are not in point to the issue as regards future asbestos claims. There is no element of discretion as regards such claims. If the ingredients of the tort of negligence . . are established, the claimants are … Continue reading In re T and N Ltd and Others, Re Insolvency Act 1986: ChD 14 Dec 2005
(Orse In re Pantmaenog Timber Co Ltd)The Receiver sought to use information obtained under section 236 (documents recovered from the directors’ solicitors) in disqualification proceedings. Held: The appeal succeeded. The Act had explicitly given the requisite powers to the receiver whether or not he was the liquidator. Nor was the purpose of the use restricted. … Continue reading Official Receiver v Wadge Rapps and Hunt (a firm) and another and two other actions: HL 31 Jul 2003
Reserved judgement on an application by administrators for an order pursuant to section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 seeking provision of a wide range of documents from the respondent building contractors. . .
Where a liquidator sought disclosure of documents prepared under statute by advisers for company, it was a matter for judge as to the extent of any redaction required. Citations: Gazette 03-Dec-1997, Times 10-Dec-1997 Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 236 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Insolvency Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.82245
Application by the liquidator of ABC Limited (‘ABC’) under section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 for the disclosure by H.M. Revenue and Customs of information obtained from the prosecution authorities of the Netherlands under an International Letter of Request which sought mutual assistance in accordance with the relevant conventions relating to criminal matters. Judges: … Continue reading XYZ v HM Revenue and Customs and Another: ChD 18 Jun 2010
A Company Court Judge may not fetter the later use of insolvency interviews by a criminal court. The obligation to give the information will not prejudice the fairness of a possible criminal trial, since the accused would still have the protection of section 78 of the Act of 1984. Judges: Lord Browne-Wilkinson Citations: Independent 26-Jul-1994, … Continue reading Hamilton and Another v Naviede and Director of SFO: HL 26 Jul 1994
The liquidator sought production of the company’s books and documents held by the defendant as former auditors of the company. Held: The power to order discovery could be more freely exercised against an officer of a company than against a third party. Nevertheless a company’s auditors were, for this purpose treated on a par with … Continue reading Green v BDO Stoy Hayward LLP: ChD 2 Nov 2005
A person required to answer questions under the section may not refuse to answer on the ground of self-incrimination. (Dillon LJ) ‘It is plain to my mind – and not least from the Cork Report – that part of the mischief in the old law before the Insolvency Act 1985 was the apparent inability of … Continue reading Bishopsgate Investment Limited v Maxwell: CA 1999
A liquidator of an Australian company sought damages from a ‘world-wide’ company Arthur Andersen’ and sought in particular to examine a partner in the UK. Examination was at first refused since an English court would not make a similar order. That erred in taking a restrictive view of English insolvency practice. ‘Insolvency Law’ did not … Continue reading England v Smith: CA 8 Dec 1999
Serious Fraud Office can still require production of Insolvency Act 1986 interviews taken before charge from the liquidator even after he has been charged.. Citations: Times 27-Apr-1993, Independent 08-Apr-1993 Statutes: Criminal Justice Act 1987 2, Insolvency Act 1986 236 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Practice, Insolvency Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.85729
Witness to Department of Trade and Industry on Company affairs to be given notice before evidence released. Citations: Times 05-Jul-1996 Statutes: Companies Act 1985 432, Insolvency Act 1986 236 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Company Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.89388
Company Liquidators have no authority to disclose evidence to creditor. Citations: Times 01-Dec-1993 Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 236 & 237 Insolvency Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83085
The presumption of innocence does not protect a suspect by providing a right of silence in a complex fraud investigation. Citations: Times 10-Feb-1997 Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 236 Human Rights, Insolvency Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81733
The liquidator of a company in a creditors voluntary liquidation, and which had been importing cigarettes received a proof of debt from a company in Zimbabwe. The liquidator suspected that the proof relied upon a false declaration in denying that true country of origin of the cigarettes to avoid import duty, and sought an order … Continue reading In Re Bellmex International Ltd: ChD 23 Mar 2000
Liquidators seeking information from directors were allowed to undertake not to disclose any information gathered to the Serious Fraud Office. Such an undertaking having been given a former company director was not able to refuse to answer questions put to him. Citations: Times 01-May-1992, Gazette 01-Jul-1992 Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 236(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Re Arrows Ltd (In Liquidation): Chd 1 Jul 1992
Adjourned hearing of an application under Section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986. Hodge QC HHJ  EWHC 2697 (Ch) Bailii Insolvency Act 1986 236 England and Wales Insolvency Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.554297
Application made pursuant to section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 by the Joint Liquidators of Comet Group Limited, (Comet), for information and documents which they contend they require to enable them to investigate and decide whether or not to pursue a claim in damages against the Respondents, Whirlpool (UK) Ltd, (Whirlpool UK), and Embraco … Continue reading Kahn and Others v Whirlpool (UK) Ltd and Another: ChD 27 Oct 2014
A company liquidator applied for an order under sections 235 and 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 that a director should disclose information to that liquidator. The Director objected that to do so would infringe his privilege against self-incrimination. In separate proceedings, heard for these purposes together, two other companies sought remedies of an account … Continue reading Bishopsgate Investment Management Ltd (In Provisional Liquidation) v Maxwell and Another: CA 13 May 1992
Section 236 extended the power of a liquidator to require from the company’s officers all the documents he would reasonably need in order to fulfil his duties under the Act.
Lord Slynn said: ‘The protection for the person called upon to produce . .
An Insolvency Court has the power to order a foreign non-party company to produce documents concerning foreign business despite the usual rule. . .
A Civil Court cannot stop the Serious Fraud Office using evidence which had been gathered under compulsion during Insolvency interviews under s236. Any element of confidentiality was overriden. . .
Transcripts of Insolvency examinations need not be disclosed to defendant, if they were disclosed to the Serious Fraud Office. . .
‘The present Application raises an interesting question about the scope of section 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (‘IA’). This has been described as the question whether the section has extraterritorial effect. More particularly, the question is . .
The Court of Appeal had allowed an appeal from the judge who had directed that the transcripts of examinations of a director of an insolvent company under section 236 on the Director of the Serious Fraud Office undertaking that the transcripts would . .
References: Times 01-May-1992, Gazette 01-Jul-1992 Ratio: Liquidators seeking information from directors were allowed to undertake not to disclose any information gathered to the Serious Fraud Office. Such an undertaking having been given a former company director was not able to refuse to answer questions put to him. Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 236(2) This case is … Continue reading Re Arrows Ltd (In Liquidation); Chd 1 Jul 1992
The company challenged the appointment of administrative receivers, saying there had been no insolvency. Held: No question arises of a derivative action arose here. The claimant had standing to apply for declaratory relief since they were directly affected by the appointment. As to the appointment itself ‘it is inconceivable that in enacting the relevant provisions … Continue reading Cabvision Ltd v Feetum and others: CA 20 Dec 2005
The claimant company had failed in its action. The court was asked to make a costs order personally against the principal director of the claimant who had controlled the litigation and funded it. He responded that no impropriety had been shown on his part to allow such an order. Held: ‘It is not a requirement … Continue reading BE Studios Ltd v Smith and Williamson Ltd: ChD 2 Dec 2005
Appeal against strike out of application to have set aside deeds of assignment. Judges: Brooke VP, Arden LJJ Citations:  EWCA Civ 276 Links: Bailii Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 167(3) 168(5) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – In Re Edennote Ltd; Tottenham Hotspur plc v Ryman CA 21-May-1996 The company was in liquidation. Terence … Continue reading Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Rigby and others: CA 19 Jan 2005
Company directors in an insolvent liquidation faced proceedings by the liquidators. They resisted providing additional evidence under examination by the liquidators. Held: The sections under the 1986 Act should be read together. Where a director faced serious charges, requiring him to provide evidence against himself would be oppressive. The existence of such proceedings must be … Continue reading Shierson and Another v Rastogi and Another: CA 9 Nov 2002
Judges: Mr Justice Richards Citations:  EWHC 2361 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – T and N Limited, Associated Companies of T and N Ltd (In Administration) v Royal and Sun Alliance Plc, and others ChD 9-May-2003 T and N had exposure to asbestosis claims; these … Continue reading Re Tand N Ltd and Others: ChD 21 Oct 2004
The applicant challenged the independence of the respondent’s disciplinary tribunal. Held: The claim failed: ‘the nature of the Tribunal is entirely adequately independent and impartial for the purposes for which it is constituted. The reasonable by-stander, properly informed of the facts, could not consider otherwise.’ The tribunal had properly considered all the evidence as to … Continue reading Holder v The Law Society: Admn 26 Jul 2005
A property adjustment order cannot be made against a bankrupt former spouse because the property of the bankrupt vests in the trustee in bankruptcy against whom an order under section 24 cannot be made. It was highly unlikely that postponement of payment of the debts would cause any great hardship to any of the creditors. … Continue reading In re Holliday: CA 1981
The Official Receiver could not use the powers given to him for the purposes of his insolvency duties to require production of documents form solicitors and accountants, to satisfy duties placed on him by the Secretary of State for the purpose of company director disqualification proceedings. The secretary of state could not ask the Official … Continue reading In re Pantmaenog Timber Co Ltd: CA 25 Jul 2001
The purposes of a liquidation, or administration or receivership of a company must include the gathering of information as to the conduct of the affairs of the company, and those who had conducted them so that the office-holder can report to the Secretary of State as he is required to do by section 7(3) of … Continue reading In re Polly Peck International plc, Ex parte the joint administrators: ChD 1994
The claimant sought damages from the first defendant for breach of copyright. An ex parte search order had been executed, with the defendant asserting his privilege against self-incrimination. As computer disks were examined, potentially unlawful images of children were found. The searching officer asked the court for directions as to what to do. Held: The … Continue reading C Plc and W v P and Secretary of State for the Home Office and the Attorney General: ChD 26 May 2006
The applicants were suspected of terrorist associations. Their bank accounts and similar had been frozen. They challenged the Order in Council under which the orders had been made without an opportunity for parliamentary challenge or approval. Held: The Orders must be set aside. ‘It is I think obvious that this procedure does not begin to … Continue reading A, K, M, Q and G v HM Treasury: Admn 24 Apr 2008
The company was said to have engaged in a fraud based on false European Trading Scheme Allowances, and had been wound up by the Revenue. The liquidators, in the company name, now sought recovery from former directors and associates. Held: The court dismissed the application: ‘First, the fact that there is, in accordance with my … Continue reading Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others v Nazir and Others: ChD 30 Jul 2012
The appeals raise a point of some general importance in relation to the powers of the official receiver; namely, whether, at a time when the official receiver is pursuing disqualification proceedings against a former director, the court has jurisdiction to make an order, on an application made by the official receiver under section 236 of … Continue reading Official Receiver v Meade-King and Another: CA 30 Jan 2001
The Court was asked ‘whether, and if so, in what circumstances, an order or judgment of a foreign court . . in proceedings to adjust or set aside prior transactions, eg preferences or transactions at an undervalue, will be recognised and enforced in England. The appeals also raise the question whether enforcement may be effected … Continue reading Rubin and Another v Eurofinance Sa and Others: SC 24 Oct 2012
The claimant beneficiary in the estate sought damages against solicitors who had acted for the claimant’s brother, the administrator, saying they had allowed him to take control of the assets in the estate. The will provided that property was to be transferred only if the claimant’s brother paid all the Inheritance Tax. It was transferred … Continue reading Roberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others: SC 19 May 2010
Whether the immunity from suit afforded to participants in court proceedings, including to parties and witnesses of fact, applies to statements made under oath and by witness statement by an examinee in the course of a private examination conducted . .
These applications raise the question of whether the court has the power under section 236(3) of the IA 1986 to require persons resident in the EU to produce books and papers and an account of their dealings with a company being compulsorily wound . .
Liquidators sought production of documents pursuant to sections 235 and 236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 from the accountants of the company for which the liquidators were appointed, . .
The provisions of the two Acts are intended to be part of the same statutory scheme and are to be read in combination. . .