Click the case name for better results:

Lomas and Others (Joint Administrators of Lehman Brothers International (Europe)) v Burlington Loan Management Ltd and Others: ChD 5 Oct 2016

The court considered the application of statutory interest pursuant to rule 2.88 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 on debts proved in the administration of Lehman Brothers International (Europe). Hildyard J [2016] EWHC 2417 (Ch) Bailii Insolvency Act 1986, Insolvency Rules 1986 2.88 England and Wales Insolvency Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569926

LB Holdings Intermediate 2 Ltd, The Joint Administrators of v Lehman Brothers International (Europe), The Joint Administrators of and Others: SC 17 May 2017

In the course of the insolvent administration of the bank, substantial additional sums were received. Parties appealed against some orders made on the application to court for directions as to what was to be done with the surplus. Held: The Court considered the so called waterfall of distributions made on liquidation which proved to be … Continue reading LB Holdings Intermediate 2 Ltd, The Joint Administrators of v Lehman Brothers International (Europe), The Joint Administrators of and Others: SC 17 May 2017

Hellas Telecommunications (Luxembourg) Ii Sca, Joint Liquidators of v Slaughter and May (A Firm): CA 24 May 2016

The court was asked whether, where a firm of solicitors provides legal services to a company in administration, Hellas Telecommunications (Luxembourg) II SCA (‘the Company’), and the firm and the administrators agree the amount of their fees, subsequently appointed liquidators of the company can ask the companies court to assess, that is, determine the amount … Continue reading Hellas Telecommunications (Luxembourg) Ii Sca, Joint Liquidators of v Slaughter and May (A Firm): CA 24 May 2016

Mirror Group Newspapers Plc v Maxwell and Others (No 2): ChD 15 Jul 1997

The Court reminded insolvency practitioners of fiduciary duties to creditors when refusing application for further payment on account of costs. Ferris J considered the principles applicable to fixing the remuneration of receivers of the estate of Robert Maxwell appointed by the court under section 37 of the 1981 Act. Their total recoveries before their remuneration … Continue reading Mirror Group Newspapers Plc v Maxwell and Others (No 2): ChD 15 Jul 1997

Kahn and Another v Commissioners of Inland Revenue; In re Toshoku Finance plc: HL 20 Feb 2002

A company went into liquidation, being owed substantial sums by another company in the same group, but itself insolvent. A settlement did not include accrued interest, but was claimed to be taxed as if it had, and on an accruals basis. If so, was this an expense properly arising in the insolvency, and payable as … Continue reading Kahn and Another v Commissioners of Inland Revenue; In re Toshoku Finance plc: HL 20 Feb 2002

Contrarian Funds Llc v Lomas and Others: ChD 23 May 2014

The court considered the approach to be taken on applications for extensions of time to apply to challenge refusals of proof of debt in an insolvency, and how to test applications for relief from sanctions. Held: The 1986 Rules which provided for extensions to time given for compliance with the Rules were not limited in … Continue reading Contrarian Funds Llc v Lomas and Others: ChD 23 May 2014

Salliss v Hunt and Others: ChD 10 Feb 2014

The bankrupt appealed from a refusal of his challenge to the remuneration claimed by his trustees in that bankruptcy. Held: On an an application for annulment of a bankruptcy, there was no need of principle why the court should allow for a debt due to a creditor, where that creditor knew of the bankruptcy but … Continue reading Salliss v Hunt and Others: ChD 10 Feb 2014

Clarke v Cognita Schools Ltd (T/A Hydesville Tower School): ChD 1 Apr 2015

The claimants sought to have set aside statutory demands served to enforce judgmens, they said under a discrepancy. The order refusing their application should they said, have notified them of their right to appeal. Held: None of the applicable rules expressly required otification that an appeal was available. Newey J [2015] EWHC 932 (Ch), [2015] … Continue reading Clarke v Cognita Schools Ltd (T/A Hydesville Tower School): ChD 1 Apr 2015

Irish Reel Productions Ltd v Capitol Films Ltd: ChD 10 Feb 2010

The petitioner’s winding-up petition had been dismissed on the defendant company being put into administration. The petitioner asked for its costs to be paid as an administration expense payable in priority to the administrator’s expenses. Held: Rule 2.12 must be read purposively. The order could be made, though not with the priority requested. Briggs J … Continue reading Irish Reel Productions Ltd v Capitol Films Ltd: ChD 10 Feb 2010

In re Rottmann (a Bankrupt): CA 18 Mar 2009

The bankrupt renewed his request for permission to appeal against a refusal to adjourn his public examination in bankruptcy. The court had allowed a private examination so as not to prejudice pending criminal proceedings in Germany. Held: The court had power to order the hearing to be conducted in private and had done so. A … Continue reading In re Rottmann (a Bankrupt): CA 18 Mar 2009

Haine v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and Another; Day v Haine: CA 11 Jun 2008

Former employees had obtained a protective award against the company for failing to consult on the impending redundancies and submitted proofs of debt to the liquidator who sought guidance from the court. The judge had held that since the Act provided only one remedy, the protective awards were not provable. Held: The appeal was allowed. … Continue reading Haine v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and Another; Day v Haine: CA 11 Jun 2008

Poulton v Ministry of Justice: CA 22 Apr 2010

The claimant was trustee in bankruptcy but the court failed to register the bankruptcy petition at the Land Registry as a pending action. The bankrupt was therefore able to sell her land, and the trustee did not recover the proceeds. The trustee sought to recover from the defendant who was responsible for the court service. … Continue reading Poulton v Ministry of Justice: CA 22 Apr 2010

Brook v Reed: CA 25 Mar 2011

The court was asked ‘What relation should the costs and remuneration bear to the circumstances, and in particular the size, of the bankruptcy?’ The bankrupt had considered that the costs first awarded to the trustee in bankruptcy and the trustee’s solicitors were disproportionate. On appeal they had been reduced, but he appealed again seeking a … Continue reading Brook v Reed: CA 25 Mar 2011

Chan v Appasamy: 2008

The test for the exercise of the discretion to set aside a statutory demand is whether there are circumstances which would make it unjust for the statutory demand to give rise to insolvency consequences in the particular case. . .

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

In re a Company (No 0012209 of 1991): ChD 1992

It is an abuse of the process of the court to make a statutory demand or present a winding-up petition based on a claim to which there is a triable defence. Where a statutory demand is made but disputed on reasonable grounds, the creditor may find himself liable to indemnity costs on its dismissal.Hoffmann J … Continue reading In re a Company (No 0012209 of 1991): ChD 1992

A, K, M, Q and G v HM Treasury: Admn 24 Apr 2008

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

Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others v Nazir and Others: ChD 30 Jul 2012

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

Re International Tin Council: ChD 1987

An order for the winding up of a foreign company operates universally, applies to all the foreign company’s assets and brings into play the full panoply of powers and duties under the Insolvency Act 1986 like any other winding up order. Millett J said: ‘The statutory trusts extend to [foreign] assets, and so does the … Continue reading Re International Tin Council: ChD 1987

Re Probe Data Systems Ltd (No.3): CA 1992

An appeal from a director disqualification is to be under the Insolvency Rules. [1992] BCC 110 Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 6 England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Paulin ChD 13-May-2005 The director sought to appeal an order disqualifying him form acting as a company director. … Continue reading Re Probe Data Systems Ltd (No.3): CA 1992

Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others: SC 12 Jun 2013

In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce, questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The judge had made such an order, finding evidence that the companies had … Continue reading Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others: SC 12 Jun 2013

Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

McGuinness v Norwich and Peterborough Building Society: CA 9 Nov 2011

The appellant had guaranteed his brother’s loan from the respondent, and the guarantee having been called in and unpaid, he had been made bankrupt. He now appealed saying that the guarantee debt, even though of a fixed amount could not form the basis of a statutory demand without action being taken on the debt first. … Continue reading McGuinness v Norwich and Peterborough Building Society: CA 9 Nov 2011

McCartney and Unite The Union and Another v Nortel Networks UK Ltd (In Administration): ChD 22 Apr 2010

The administrators gave employees of the company notice of termination of their employment. Then administrators refused consent under para 43(6) to actions against the company in the Northern Ireland Industrial Tribunal for protective awards, unfair dismissal, breach of contract and otherwise. The claims were issued anyway, and the administrators argued that they were a nullity, … Continue reading McCartney and Unite The Union and Another v Nortel Networks UK Ltd (In Administration): ChD 22 Apr 2010

In re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd: CA 1990

The court gave guidelines for the periods of disqualification to be applied for company directors under the Act. The maximum period of ten years should be reserved for only the most serious of cases. Periods of two to five years should apply to cases at the bottom end, and the middle bracket of 6 to … Continue reading In re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd: CA 1990

Rainy Sky Sa and Others v Kookmin Bank: SC 2 Nov 2011

Commercial Sense Used to Interpret Contract The Court was asked as to the role of commercial good sense in the construction of a term in a contract which was open to alternative interpretations. Held: The appeal succeeded. In such a case the court should adopt the more, rather than the less, commercial construction, applying the … Continue reading Rainy Sky Sa and Others v Kookmin Bank: SC 2 Nov 2011

McGrath and others v Riddell and others: HL 9 Apr 2008

(Orse In Re HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd)HIH, an Australian Insurance company, became insolvent. An order was sought for the collection and remission of it assets in England under a letter of request from the Australia Court. Held: Once it was accepted that an English court may order the liquidator here to remit funds … Continue reading McGrath and others v Riddell and others: HL 9 Apr 2008

Rubin and Another v Eurofinance Sa and Others: SC 24 Oct 2012

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

Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

NML Capital Ltd v Argentina: SC 6 Jul 2011

The respondent had issued bonds but in 2001 had declared a moratorium on paying them. The appellant hedge fund later bought the bonds, heavily discounted. Judgment was obtained in New York, which the appellants now sought to enforce against assets in the UK. They argued that the terms of issue waived state immunity. Held: The … Continue reading NML Capital Ltd v Argentina: SC 6 Jul 2011

Roberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others: SC 19 May 2010

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