Category: Insolvency

Lehman Brothers Luxembourg Investments Sarl v Lehman Brothers UK Holdings Ltd: ChD 21 Mar 2016

The parties asked the court to rule on a question which has arisen about the legal status of certain payments made, or expected to be made, to the Company by the administrators of its wholly-owned subsidiary, Lehman Brothers UK Holdings Limited (‘LBUKH’). The payments in question are part repayments of subordinated loans made by the Company to LBUKH under three subordinated loan facility agreements (two long term, and one short term) made between June 2004 and July 2005. The issue, in short, is whether the repayments should be held in trust for LBUKH and/or any as yet unknown creditors of LBUKH, or whether the repayments are held by the Company free from any trust and are available, in particular, for distribution to the Company’s own creditors.

Henderson J
[2016] EWHC 617 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Insolvency, Financial Services

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561523

Kebbell and Another v Hat and Mitre Plc and Others (As Joint Administrators of Hat and Mitre Plc): ChD 8 Oct 2020

Application by two shareholders and directors of the Company, the principal purpose of which is to obtain a determination that the Company is not, or no longer should be, in administration.

Trower J
[2020] EWHC 2649 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Company, Insolvency

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.654540

Padwick Properties Ltd v Punj Lloyd Ltd: ChD 9 Mar 2016

The tenant had left the property, their solicitors writing informing the landlord that it had vacated the Property and asserting that ‘the security and safety of the Property will revert to your client.’ The keys were returned, and on the insolvency of the tenant, the lease was disclaimed. The landlord then required the defendant, under the guarantee to pay arrears, and enter into a new lease.
Held: There had been no surrender of the lease. The landlord’s agent had been clear that in accepting the key he did so for security and not by way of retaking possession.

Keyser QC HHJ
[2016] EWHC 502 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Oastler v Henderson 1877
The tenancy was for seven years. Shortly after its creation, the tenant left the keys with the agent and asked him to dispose of it or make the best bargain for surrender he could, and left for America. A tenant not being found, the agent returned . .
Cited – Relvok Properties Ltd v Dixon CA 1972
A lease was assigned to a Mr Krokidis who then departed. The landlords instructed Estate Agents to change the locks. The defendants said that that amounted to a surrender of the lease.
Held: They were wrong: ‘In my judgment Judge Irving . .
Cited – Evans v James (Administratrix of the Estate of Thomas Hopkin Deceased) CA 5-Jul-1999
Before the parties called evidence, and having read the papers, the court considered that there was no real defence shown, and invited submissions. Negotiations for the grant of a tenancy had been terminated by the sudden illness of the proposed . .
Cited – Bellcourt Estates Ltd v Adesina CA 18-Feb-2005
The landlord sought to recover arrears of rent. The tenant said that she had surrendered the lease of the properties. The judge had held that she ceased to occupy the premises from November 2000, after which the landlord did not send a demand for . .
Cited – Artworld Financial Corporation v Safaryan and Others CA 27-Feb-2009
The parties disputed whether the landlord had accepted the surrender of a lease. The tenant had handed in the keys. The landlord claimed rent for the subsequent period. The court had found surrender by operation of law, the landlord taking several . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Insolvency

Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.560749

John Cathcart of London, Merchant v Alexander Blackwood, Merchant, Edinburgh: HL 26 Feb 1765

Bankruptcy – Foreign – Certificate and Discharge.-
A company in London became bankrupt, and, under the bankruptcy, obtained a certificate and discharge. Some years thereafter an action was raised by a creditor who had ranked and obtained his dividend out of the estate for payment of his debt, against the surviving partner in Scotland: Held that the discharge and certificate protected him, in terms of the 5 Geo. II. c. 30, – 70; and that concealment of property in Scotland, which did not then belong to him, was no bar to the benefit of the act.

[1765] UKHL 2 – Paton – 100, (1765) 2 Paton 100
Bailii
Scotland

Insolvency

Updated: 11 January 2022; Ref: scu.560604

Bilta (Uk) Ltd v Nazir and Others: ChD 24 Nov 2010

The company had been wound up by the Revenue on the basis that it had been used for a substantial VAT fraud. The liquidators now sued those said to have participated. A defendant denied the jurisdiction because of a disputed arbitration agreement. The claimant sought to have the defence struck out on the basis that documents had been destroyed by the defendant.
Held: The applications generally failed.

Lewison J
[2010] EWHC 3227 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Bilta (UK) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Nazir and Others ChD 17-May-2010
The sixth defendant resisted a claim against it saying that matters between them were governed by a framework agreement which provided for matters to be resolved by arbitration. The claimant resisted, denying the arbitration agreement and saying . .
Cited – Logicrose Ltd v Southend United Football Club Ltd CA 5-Feb-1988
The agent required the contractual counterparty to pay a bribe of pounds 70,000 to an offshore account.
Held: The bribe was held to be recoverable by the principal whether the principal rescinded or affirmed the contract because it was a . .
Cited – Landaur Limited v Cummings and Co 4-May-1991
An inadvertent destruction of documents may have the same consequences visited on the party as a deliberate destruction. . .
Cited – Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others CA 22-Jun-2000
A petition had been lodged alleging unfair prejudice in the conduct of the company’s affairs. The defendants alleged that when applying for relief under section 459, the claimants had attempted to pervert the course of justice by producing forged or . .
Cited – Woodhouse v Consignia Plc; Steliou v Compton CA 7-Mar-2002
The claimant continued an action brought in her late husband’s name. The action had begun under the former rules. After the new rules came into effect, the action was automatically stayed, since no progress had been made for over a year. Her . .
Cited – Douglas, Zeta-Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Ltd, Hola Sa, Junco, The Marquesa De Varela, Neneta Overseas Ltd, Ramey ChD 27-Jan-2003
The claimants sought an order striking out the defendants’ defence on the grounds that, by destroying documents, the possibility of a fair trial had been prejudiced.
Held: Refusing the order, save as to certain paragraphs of the defence, the . .

Cited by:
See Also – 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 . .
At first instance (2) – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others CA 31-Jul-2013
Defendants appealed against refusal of their request for a summary striking out for lack of jurisdiction, of the claims against them arising from their management of the insolvency of the first defendant. . .
At first Instance (2) – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others SC 22-Apr-2015
The liquidators of Bilta had brought proceedings against former directors and the appellant alleging that they were party to an unlawful means conspiracy which had damaged the company by engaging in a carousel fraud with carbon credits. On the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560327

National Asset Loan Management Ltd v Cahillane: ChD 20 Jan 2015

Appeal by the petitioning creditor, National Asset Loan Management Limited (‘NALM’), against the orders of Chief Registrar Baister dated 23rd June 2014, adjourning NALM’s bankruptcy petition and making directions on an application dated 20th June 2014 by the debtor, Mr Cahillane, brought under s.375 of the Insolvency Act 1986

Kevin Prosser QC
[2015] EWHC 62 (Ch), [2016] 1 All ER (Comm) 310, [2015] 4 All ER 380, [2015] BPIR 1433, [2016] 1 WLR 45
Bailii
England and Wales

Insolvency

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560280

Caldwell v Hamilton: HL 25 Jul 1919

A bankrupt whose estates had been sequestrated continued to earn by service a salary. Held that it was competent to pronounce an order ordaining him to pay to his trustee out of the income so earned, as and when received, what was held to be in excess of a suitable aliment for him, reserving right to the trustee, the bankrupt, and any other persons interested to apply further to the Court in the event of any change of circumstances.

Viscount Finlay, Viscount Cave, Lord Dunedin, Lord Shaw, and Lord Wrenbury
[1919] UKHL 529, 56 SLR 529
Bailii
Scotland

Insolvency

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.632778

Narandas-Girdhar and Another v Bradstock: CA 16 Feb 2016

Appeal from rejection of claim to have set aside Individual Voluntary Arrangement

Black, Ryder, Briggs LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 88, [2016] WLR(D) 79, 166 Con LR 1, [2016] 1 WLR 2366, [2016] BPIR 428
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Wright and Another (Liquidators of SHB Realisations Ltd) v The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd ChD 6-Mar-2018
IVA is a special form of contract
Liquidators asked the court whether sums sought by the insolvent company’s landlords were payable and or provable. Under an IVA, the copany had been paying reduced rents, but the arrangement document provided that the full rents would be restored on . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.559989

Grant and Another v Ralls and Others (Re Ralls Builders Ltd): ChD 11 Feb 2016

Action by Liquidator against directors for wrongful trading. The court was asked Whether the liquidators had established continued trading causing a loss to company in order to attribute personal liability on the directors.
Held: Section 214(3) was intended to impose a high hurdle on the directors, being construed strictly it would require a director seeking to rely on that the defence to show not only that continued trading was intended to reduce the net deficiency of the company, but also that it was designed appropriately so as to minimise the risk of loss to individual creditors. If not, then a director could make out the defence under section 214(3) by claiming that he traded on with a view to reducing the overall deficiency by creditors as a general body, irrespective of how he achieved that result as between creditors.

Snowden J
[2016] EWHC 243 (Ch), [2016] 1 Costs LR 185, [2016] BCC 293, [2016] WLR(D) 69, [2016] Bus LR 555
Bailii, WLRD
Insolvency Act 1986 214
England and Wales

Insolvency

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560087

Turnbull’s Creditors (Erskine and Others) v Colonel Scott of Comiston: HL 27 Feb 1756

Notour Bankruptcy – Statute 1696. –
Held that apprehension by a messenger under a caption, with detention for a whole night, but without being put in jail, and afterwards allowed to go on part payment of the debt, was a sufficient imprisonment under the act, so as to constitute notour bankruptcy.

[1756] UKHL 1 – Paton – 614
Bailii
Scotland

Insolvency

Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.558231

Transag Haulage Ltd (In Admin Receivership) v Leyland Daf Finance Plc and Another: ChD 31 Jan 1994

Hire-purchase agreements for the hire of three lorries were entered into by Transag, a haulier, between January and May 1991. The price for the three lorries was andpound;177,333, with down payments totalling andpound;69,333 and the balance (for each vehicle) due by 36 monthly payments of andpound;1000. Transag went into administrative receivership in November 1993, when only about andpound;14,000 remained to be paid and the lorries were worth about andpound;67,000. The agreements were in standard form with provision for termination by the owner after a default, which included receivership. Provisions for termination, included return of the vehicles to the owner and an immediate liability for outstanding instalments; and ‘If the hirer (having duly observed and performed all the terms and conditions of this agreement whether expressed or implied, and having paid all sums due under this agreement) shall pay to the owner the sum of andpound;5 the hiring thereby constituted shall determine and the hirer shall become the absolute owner of the goods but until such time the goods shall remain the sole property of the owner and the hirer shall be a mere bailee thereof.’ Transag requested relief from forfeiture.
Held: The case was ‘one of those rare cases’ where it would be right for the court to exercise its discretion and grant relief on terms that the outstanding instalments were to be paid within seven days. A hirer might be given given equitable relief in respect of its proprietary rights despite its receivership. The court should look at the extent of financial defaults, the extent of any disproportionate loss which would be incurred for either owner or hirer, and any substantial windfall profit which might accrue to the owner.

Knox J
Ind Summary 31-Jan-1994, Times 15-Jan-2004, [1994] 2 BCLC 88
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – BICC plc v Burndy Corp CA 1985
. .
Cited – Goker (Ali) v NSW Bank CA 23-May-1990
In the case of a hire purchase agreement, the court has a power to grant relief from forfeiture, but will not normally exercise that power unless there is no real prejudice to the owner of the goods. . .

Cited by:
Applied – On Demand Information Plc and Another v Michael Gerson (Finance) Plc and Another CA 19-Sep-2000
The power to grant relief from forfeiture in finance leases was real, but ceased to be available after property repossessed by the finance company had been contracted for sale by the applicants. The application for relief was in its nature, an . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Contract

Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.89974

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 said: ‘It does seem to me that a tendency has developed, possibly since the decision in Cornhill Insurance plc v Improvement Services Ltd [1986] BCLC 26, [1986] 1 WLR 114, to present petitions against solvent companies as a way of putting pressure upon them to make payments of money which is bona fide disputed rather than to invoke the procedures which the rules provide for summary judgment. I do not for a moment wish to detract from anything which was said in the Cornhill Insurance case, which indeed followed earlier authority, to the effect that a refusal to pay an indisputable debt is evidence from which the inference may be drawn that the debtor is unable to pay. It was, however, a somewhat unusual case in which it was quite clear that the company in question had no grounds at all for its refusal. Equally it seems to me that if the court comes to the conclusion that a solvent company is not putting forward any defence in good faith and is merely seeking to take for itself credit which it is not allowed under the contract, then the court would not be inclined to re-strain presentation of the petition. But, if, as in this case, it appears that the defence has a prospect of success and the company is solvent, then I think that the court should give the company the benefit of the doubt and not do anything which would encourage the use of the Companies Court as an alternative to the RSC Ord 14 procedure.’

Hoffmann J
[1992] 2 All ER 797, [1992] 1 WLR 351, [1992] BCLC 865
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd CA 26-Jan-1994
Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders
Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an . .
Cited – BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd and Others v Neuberger SC 9-May-2013
Potential Insolvency effect under guarantee
The various parties had entered into complex and substantial financial arrangements incorporating guarantees. The guarantees were conditional upon the guaranteed party being solvent. The parties disputed whether a party which would otherwise be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Company, Insolvency

Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.278997

Stichting Shell Pensioenfonds v Krys and Another: PC 26 Nov 2014

(British Virgin Islands- Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal) The defendant pension funds appealed againat an order allowing the respondent liquidators’ appeal against the refusalof an anti-suit injunction to restrain the now appellants pursuing an action in the Netherlands.
Held: The appeal failed. No principle existed to refuse an anti-suit injunction on the basis that the proceedings were to take place in the foreign party’s own jurisdiction.
Lord Toulson said: liquidator and ultimately by the court according to its merits and satisfied according to the rules of distribution if it is admitted.’

Lady Hale, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Toulson
[2014] UKPC 41, [2015] 2 WLR 289, [2015] 1 BCLC 597, [2015] BCC 205, [2014] WLR(D) 516, [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 97, [2015] AC 616
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Insolvency

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.539287

Global Torch Ltd v Apex Global Management Ltd: ChD 13 Feb 2013

Applications within unfair prejudice petitions.

Morgan J
[2013] EWHC 223 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Application for leave – Global Torch Ltd and Others v Apex Global Management CA 18-Apr-2013
Oral renewal of an application for permission to appeal . .
Appeal from – Global Torch Ltd v Apex Global Management Ltd and Others CA 10-Jul-2013
. .
See Also – Apex Global Management and Another v Global Torch Ltd and Others ChD 30-Oct-2013
The court rejected an application by Prince Abdulaziz for a variation of case management orders. . .
At First Instance – Prince Abdulaziz v Apex Global Management Ltd and Another SC 26-Nov-2014
The appellant was involved in very substantial litigation with the respondents. As a member of the Saudi Royal family he said that by convention he was not allowed to sign a witness statement, and appealed inter alia against orders requiring him to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Insolvency

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.470950

Re Public Joint-Stock Company Commercial Bank ‘Privatbank’: ChD 13 Nov 2015

The Bank applied for the sanction of the Court to a scheme of arrangement under section 899 of the 2006 Act with creditors in respect of two series of subordinated loan notes, having an aggregate nominal value of US $220 million.

David Richards J
[2015] EWHC 3299 (Ch)
Bailii
Companies Act 2006 899
England and Wales

Insolvency, Banking

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.554803

Krys and Others v KBC Partners Lp and Others: PC 19 Nov 2015

From the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (British Virgin Islands) – The parties disputed the destination for funds held by a limited partnership set up to manage investments of principals whose identities were hidden.

Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge
[2015] UKPC 46
Bailii

Commonwealth, Company, Insolvency

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.554763

Janet Maxwell of Cowhill, and Charles Maxwell Her Husband v George Sharp of Hoddam, Advocate, Son and Heir of John Sharp of Hoddam, Deceased Et E Contra: HL 10 Jun 1721

Judicial Factor – A person who had become surety for a judicial factor, and afterwards had a deputation from him, could by no right acquired during the factory invert the heir’s possession: he could not retain possession till his debts were paid, but must pursue for them as accords.
He is also found liable in terms of the act of sederunt, 31 July 1690, in annual-rent for what he received or might have received within one year after the same grew due. He was entitled to no factor-fee, having disturbed the possession of the factor by virtue of other rights and titles in his own person.
Commissary Court – This could not give decrees of preference among competing creditors.
Process; Decree – In a decree, a former decree being founded upon as the ground thereof, and such former decree not pronounced, the second decree was null.
Annual-rent – Aliments to children were to be imputed to the rents of the years in which they were paid, and not deducted out of the annual-rents due by a factor.

[1721] UKHL Robertson – 380, (1721) Robertson 380
Bailii
Scotland

Insolvency

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553675

PST Energy 7 Shipping Llc Product Shipping and Trading SA v OW Bunker Malta Ltd and Others: CA 22 Oct 2015

The oil owners had contracted for its transport with OWBM aboard Res Cogitans under standard terms which would allow the captain to use the oil for navigation before transfer of the title in the oil. The court was now asked whether the agreement amounted to a sale governed by 1979 Act allowing for a claim for payment of the price under section 49(1).
Held:
Moore-Bick V-P said: ‘Whatever label one attaches to the contract (and I see nothing incongruous in describing it in commercial terms as a contract for the sale of goods), its essential nature is in my view reasonably clear. It is a contract under which goods are to be delivered to the owners as bailees with a licence to consume them for the propulsion of the vessel, coupled with an agreement to sell any quantity remaining at the date of payment, in return for a money consideration which in commercial terms can properly be described as the price. That may not satisfy the definition of a contract of sale of goods in section 2(1) of the 1979 Act, but there is no reason why the incidents of a contract of sale of goods for which the Act provides should not apply equally to such a contract at common law, save to the extent that they are inconsistent with the parties’ agreement. The difficulties in the present case stem entirely from the owners’ attempt to establish that the consideration for the payment of the price was the transfer of property in the whole of the goods to which the contract related, despite the fact that that does not correspond to the express terms of the contract relating to the use of the goods and the passing of title. The commercial background and the terms of the contract make it clear that what the owners contracted for was not the transfer of property in the whole of the bunkers, but the delivery of a quantity of bunkers which they had an immediate right to use but for which they would not have to pay until the period of credit expired. From the suppliers’ point of view the retention of title clause provided an ever diminishing degree of security for the payment of what was due to them. Since the contract provided for the transfer to the owners of property in any part of the bunkers remaining at the time of payment, it was to that extent a contract for the sale of goods to which the Act, including the implied condition in section 12, applied. A failure to pass title to any residue remaining at the time of payment would therefore involve a breach of contract, but it would not be one which entitled the owners to treat the contract as a whole as discharged, unless (contrary to all expectations) it represented such a large proportion of the quantity originally delivered that there could be said to have been a total failure of consideration.
For these reasons I agree with the judge that the transfer of property in the bunkers from OWBM to the owners was not the essential subject matter of the contract and that a failure to transfer property in the bunkers, all of which had been consumed when the period of credit expired, did not relieve the owners of the obligation to pay for them.’

Moore-Bick VP CA, Longmore, McCombe LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 1058, [2016] 1 All ER (Comm) 503, [2016] 2 WLR 1072, [2016] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 228, [2015] WLR(D) 426
Bailii, WLRD
Sale of Goods Act 1979 2 49(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
At ComC – PST Energy 7 Shipping Llc and Another v OW Bunker Malta Ltd and Another (Res Cogitans) ComC 14-Jul-2015
The OW Bunker Group had gone into insolvency. Purchasers from them were no concerned at the possibility, under the industry standard tersm, of having to pay twice.
Held: The owners’ appeal from the arbitration award failed.
The court . .
Cited – Arnold v Britton and Others SC 10-Jun-2015
Absurdity did not defeat a clear clause
A standard lease of plots on a caravan park, contained a provision which appeared to increase the rent by 10% in each year. The tenants argued that such a substantial increase could not have been intended.
Held: The tenants’ appeal failed . .
Cited – Clough Mill Ltd v Martin CA 1984
The plaintiff had supplied yarn to a company H on terms that the goods were to remain its property until paid for in full, although H was granted the power to sell the goods or use them for the purpose of manufacturing products. The terms also . .
Cited – Borden (UK) Ltd v Scottish Timber Products Ltd CA 1979
The plaintiff sold a quantity of resin to the defendant for use in the manufacture of chipboard. The contract contained a reservation of title clause, but both parties contemplated that the resin would be used in the process of production before it . .

Cited by:
At CA – PST Energy 7 Shipping Llc and Another v OW Bunker Malta Ltd and Another SC 11-May-2016
Parties had entered into a bunker supply contract which contained a retention of title clause in favour of the supplier. It purported to allow the buyer to use the goods before title came to be passed.
Held: The owner’s appeal failed. It did . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Transport, Insolvency

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553685

Edginton v Sekhon and Another: CA 23 Jun 2015

The claimant had in the past acted as solicitor for the defendants. He now appealed against a bankruptcy order made at the request of the defendants, saying that the court had wrongly rejected his request for an adjournment to allow him a reasonable time to pay the sums due.

Lord Dyson MR, Lewison, Underhill LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 816, [2015] 1 WLR 4435
Bailii
England and Wales

Insolvency

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553678

Nike European Operations Netherlands v Sportland Oy: ECJ 15 Oct 2015

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 – Articles 4 and 13 – Insolvency proceedings – Detrimental legal acts – Action for restitution of payments made before the date on which insolvency proceedings were opened – Law of the Member State in which insolvency proceedings were opened – Law of the Member State governing the legal act at issue – Law not allowing ‘any means of challenging that act in the relevant case’ – Burden of proof

C-310/14, [2015] EUECJ C-310/14
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 4 13

European, Insolvency

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553621

George Lockhart Esq; v John Chiefly of Kersewell, Writer In Edinburgh, Margaret Pow, William Montgomery, Walter Chiefly, and William Bertram: HL 7 Jun 1714

Non-entry – A Superior having obtained a general declaratory of non-entry, his agent in a subsequent ranking restricts the superior’s interest so as to be ranked posterior to annual renters. On a reduction by the superior on the head of lesion and as being absens reipublicae causa, the ranking is sustained.
Ranking and Sale – It is not relevant to reduce a decreet of ranking, that posterior to the date of the decreet the interests of certain creditors were produced, and ranked, and yet no new decreet put up in the minute-book.

[1714] UKHL Robertson – 80, (1714) Robertson 80
Bailii

Scotland, Insolvency

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553470

Michael Russell of London, Merchant v John Cochran of Waterside Esq: HL 12 Jun 1714

Presumption. – A bond is granted for a partnership debt to an individual creditor by one partner; the same partner afterwards executes an assignment of the partnership funds to the creditors in general, bearing to be in full payment and satisfaction of the partnership debts; this was recited in a power of attorney granted by the creditors; though the assignment was not executed by the other partner, it extinguished the bond to the individual creditor.

[1714] UKHL Robertson – 84, (1714) Robertson 84
Bailii

Company, Insolvency, Scotland

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553473

Sir Robert Home, Bart v Sir Patrick Home, Bart: HL 1 Jul 1714

Sequestration. – A sequestration, granted of an estate, where a person was in possession by virtue of a tack from his father for payment of debts, adjudications in his person with expired legals, and a disposition from an elder brother, which, though reduced for fraud and circumvention, was still to stand as a security for the onerous cause thereof.
Presumption. – From circumstances of presumption a person is made to count and reckon for property, which with his content had formerly been conveyed by a weak elder brother to another person.

[1714] UKHL Robertson – 105, (1714) Robertson 105
Bailii

Insolvency, Scotland

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553476

Barclays Bank Plc (T/A Barclays Global Payment Acceptance) v The Registrar of Companies and Others: ChD 7 Oct 2015

The court was asked: ‘ what steps (if any) are open to a creditor to get in additional assets belonging to a dissolved company that was formerly in administration. In particular is it open to the creditor (a) to restore the company to the register (b) then to seek a winding up order and (c) as part of that application to ask for the winding up petition to be treated as presented as at some earlier date?’

[2015] EWHC 2806 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Insolvency, Company

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553114

Sands and Another v Singh and Others: ChD 1 Jun 2015

The court was asked whether or not the applicant trustees in bankruptcy of Mr. Tarlochan Singh (‘the bankrupt’) have lost all their rights under the provisions of s. 283A of the Insolvency Act 1986 (‘the Act’) to a particular property. The property was at the date of the bankruptcy registered in the bankrupt’s name. It was then and still is the sole or principal residence of the bankrupt’s former wife.

Purle QC HHJ
[2015] EWHC 2219 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Insolvency

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553050

Wood v Lowe and Others: ChD 18 Sep 2015

Application by the Trustee in Bankruptcy of the First Respondent, Mr Keith Lowe for a declaration as to the extent, if any, of the Bankrupt’s proprietary interest in some of the items set out in a document headed ‘Further Inventory’

Saffman HHJ
[2015] EWHC 2634 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Insolvency

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553057

In re Hampton Capital Ltd: ChD 9 Jul 2015

The companyy’s joint administrator requested orders under section 238 as against various payments made by the Company and for payment of the equivalent sums.

George Bompas QC
[2015] EWHC 1905 (Ch)
Bailii
Insolvency Act 1986 238
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Lipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd HL 6-Jun-1991
The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.553051

Lomas and Others v Burlington Loan Management Ltd and Others (No 2): ComC 31 Jul 2015

‘This judgment considers issues concerning the entitlement of creditors to interest on their debts for periods after the commencement of the administration of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (LBIE) on 15 September 2008.’

[2015] EWHC 2269 (Ch), [2015] WLR(D) 349
Bailii, WLRD
Cited by:
See Also – Lomas and Others v Burlington Loan Management Ltd and Others ComC 31-Jul-2015
‘This judgment concerns the construction and effect of agreements made since the commencement of the administration of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (LBIE) between LBIE acting by its joint administrators and very significant numbers of its . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.550959

Lomas and Others v Burlington Loan Management Ltd and Others: ComC 31 Jul 2015

‘This judgment concerns the construction and effect of agreements made since the commencement of the administration of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (LBIE) between LBIE acting by its joint administrators and very significant numbers of its creditors.’

David Richards J
[2015] EWHC 2270 (Ch)
Bailii
Insolvency Act 1986
Citing:
See Also – Lomas and Others v Burlington Loan Management Ltd and Others (No 2) ComC 31-Jul-2015
‘This judgment considers issues concerning the entitlement of creditors to interest on their debts for periods after the commencement of the administration of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (LBIE) on 15 September 2008.’ . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Contract

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.550960

Re Sigma Finance Corp: CA 25 Nov 2008

[2008] EWCA Civ 1303, [2009] BCC 393
Bailii
Insolvency Act 1986
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sigma Finance Corporation, Re Insolvency Act 1986 ChD 7-Nov-2008
. .

Cited by:
Appeal From – Sigma Finance Corporation, Re; (in administrative receivership) SC 29-Oct-2009
The court considered how the losses of the insolvent company were to be distributed as between secured creditors and preferential creditors, given the terms of the applicable trust deed.
Held: The court considered the interpretations of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.278522

The Office of The Bankruptcy Adjudicator and Another v Shaw: ChD 7 Oct 2021

Appeal to the High Court from a decision of a district judge exercising insolvency jurisdiction in the county court on appeal from a decision of the bankruptcy adjudicator raising two fundamental, and apparently novel, questions.
The first concerns the evidential burden, if any, resting on an applicant for a bankruptcy order to adduce evidence as to his inability to access his pension pots for the purposes of demonstrating, as required by section 263K(1)(b) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (as amended), that he is unable to pay his debts at the date of the adjudicator’s determination of his bankruptcy application.
The second question concerns the potential liability of the Secretary of State to an order under section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 to pay the costs incurred by an applicant for a bankruptcy order who successfully challenges the refusal of the bankruptcy adjudicator to make a bankruptcy order on his application.

His Honour Judge Hodge QC,
Sitting as a Judge of the High Court
[2021] EWHC 3140 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Insolvency

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.670285

Cole v Howlett and Others: ChD 16 Jun 2015

The claimant wished to sue for breach of copyright. Many years ago, he had been bankrupt and he now sought leave to amend his pleadings to add an assignment of the cause of action from his trustee.

Peter Smith J
[2015] EWHC 1697 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property, Insolvency

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549004

Woolwich Building Society v Taylor and Another: ChD 17 May 1994

A person requesting third party information under the Act, must first establish a claim sufficient to justify the right claimed. The third party claimant’s right against the insured arose at the time when the claimant suffered a loss but that the right of the insured to sue his insurer in respect of the liability he had incurred did not arise until the liability had been ascertained by judgment, award or agreement. Since it was impossible to know whether a right had been transferred until such judgment award or agreement had occurred, no information could reasonably be required, before such judgment award or agreement, ‘for the purpose of ascertaining whether any rights have been transferred or vested’ in the claimant by the Act.

Lindsay J
Times 17-May-1994, [1995] 1 BCLC 132
Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930 2
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – First National Tricity Finance Ltd v OT Computers Ltd; In re OT Computers Ltd (in administration) CA 25-May-2004
The company had gone into liquidation. They had sold consumer policies as extended warranties on behalf of the claimant. The company had insured its own joint liability under the contracts, and the claimant sought information from the company’s . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Insurance

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.90601