Circuit Systems Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another v Zuken Redac (Uk) Ltd: CA 5 Apr 1996

The assignment of a debt by a company in liquidation to a significant shareholder, in order to allow him to make an application for legal aid, and to avoid having to give security for costs and to allow the action to proceed was not unlawful, but the Legal Aid Board should be careful in supporting such contrived litigation.
Lord Justice Staughton, Lord Justice Simon Brown and Lord Justice Thorpe
Gazette 01-May-1996, Times 05-Apr-1996
Law of Property Act 1925 136(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
AppliedJoyce v Sengupta and Another CA 31-Jul-1992
The defendant published an article accusing the plaintiff of theft. Not having funds to launch a claim in libel, the plaintiff obtained legal aid to claim in malicious falsehood. She now appealed against a strike out of that claim.
Held: A . .
AppliedStein v Blake HL 18-May-1995
Where A and B each have claims against each other and A is insolvent, the common amount is set off, and the net difference remains as a debt due.
Hoffmann L said: ‘It is a matter of common occurrence for an individual to become insolvent while . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromNorglen Ltd (In Liquidation) v Reeds Rains Prudential Ltd and Others; Circuit Systems Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another v Zuken-Redac HL 1-Dec-1997
An assignment of a cause of action by a company in liquidation was valid, even though the dominant purpose was to avoid having to give security for costs, and to get legal aid. In dismissing the argument that the transactions were a device to defeat . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 April 2021; Ref: scu.79137