Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  















Insolvency - From: 1996 To: 1996

This page lists 45 cases, and was prepared on 08 August 2015.

 
Royal Bank of Scotland -v- Farley [1996] BPIR 638
1996
CA
Hoffmann LJ
Insolvency
If it can be demonstrated by evidence subsequent to the bankruptcy order, that the debts on which the petition was founded did not exist, then it would be right to say that there was a ground existing at the time the order was made on which it should not have been made.
1 Citers


 
In re Mordant [1996] 1 FLR 334
1996
CA
Sir D Nicholls V-C
Family, Insolvency
The court discussed the interplay of family and insolvency proceedings: "Since the wife is unable to prove in the husband's bankruptcy, the position… is that the husband's trustee must use the £385,000 in paying the trustee's expenses and remuneration and, subject to that, he must distribute the money between the husband's creditors but excluding the wife. This would mean there would be a substantial surplus available to be returned to the husband. No doubt the wife could take steps to intercept the surplus. Even so, the result would be that the unsecured creditors would be paid in full, save for the wife. She would not receive the whole of the lump sum ordered by the judge. Indeed, far from even sharing equally with the husband's other creditors, she would rank behind them all. She would receive the crumbs from the husband's table left unconsumed by his other creditors. This is the consequence of r 12.3(2)(a) " and "I feel bound to say that the exclusion of an obligation to pay a lump sum arising under an order in family proceedings from proof as a debt in bankruptcy is a matter which would bear re-examination as a matter of urgency…"
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Christopher Moran Holdings Limited -v- Vivian Murray Bairstow and Nigel Ruddock [1996] 1 WLR 649
1996
ChD
Ferris J
Landlord and Tenant, Insolvency
The tenant company went into a members' solvent liquidation, and disclaimed the lease. At the time, the rental value had fallen very much below the contractual rent. The landlord sought to prove the balance of the rent with no allowance for being accelerated. The liquidator said the claim should be discounted for having been accelerated. Held: The claim was correct as submitted.
Insolvency Act 1986 178(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Re Bullard & Taplin Ltd [1996] BCC 973
1996
ChD
Knox J
Litigation Practice, Insolvency
Tne question of whether there was at any time 'pending court proceedings' was answered by asking if there existed a court file. The section empowered a court itself to appoint another trustee in bankruptcy. Section 41 of the 1984 Act could be used by the HighCourt to take some control over proceedings for an individual voluntary arrangement in the County Court.
Insolvency Act 1986 303 - County Courts Act 1984 41(1)
1 Citers


 
Brillouet -v- Hachette Magazines Ltd [1996] BPIR 518
1996

Vinelott J
Insolvency, Litigation Practice
A party should not be allowed to put an argument again which had been lost at an earlier stage merely because he felt he had found a better way of putting the argument.
1 Citers


 
Albert -v- Albert [1996] BPIR 233
1996

Millett LJ
Family, Insolvency
The court considered the duty of a family court when deciding ancillary relief applications where the husband is bankrupt. Millett LJ said: "The Family Division is concerned to ascertain the amount of the bankrupt's income and to decide how much of that income should be made available to maintain the wife and child. In making its determination it must ascertain the amount of the bankrupt's income as best it may, on the evidence put before it. But the amount of that income will be affected by any order that the Insolvency Court has made, or may subsequently make , which has the effect of diverting the bankrupt's income in or towards payment of his creditors. The Family Division is concerned with the division of the cake, but the size of the cake is liable to be diminished by an order made by the Insolvency Court."
1 Citers


 
In re Polly Peck International plc [1996] 2 All ER 433
1996
ChD
Robert Walker J
Company, Insolvency
It was argued, unsuccessfully, that a special purpose company incorporated in the Cayman Islands should be regarded as a single economic unit with the holding company, so as to eliminate "double dip" as well as double dividend. Held: There would be obvious unfairness to other creditors if both a principal creditor and a surety were entitled to prove for and receive a dividend in respect of what is in substance a single debt. Robert Walker J said: "The rule against double proof is a long-standing principle of the law of bankruptcy, and has applied in the winding up of companies since the Companies Act 1862 (see Re Oriental Commercial Bank, ex p European Bank (1871) LR 7 Ch App 99). It has often been described in terms of straightforward and obvious fairness, depending on substance, not form
. . Much the commonest situation in which the rule against double proof applies is that of suretyship. Indeed it has been said that it applies only in a situation which actually is, or is analogous to, that of suretyship (the latter category includes the old cases on negotiable instruments considered in Re Oriental Commercial Bank ex p European Bank). It is therefore convenient to set out some very elementary rules as to suretyship, shorn of complications arising from the provision of security or from the Ellis v Emmanuel distinction. In what follows, C is the principal creditor, D the principal debtor, and S the surety (and all are companies).
(1) So long as any money remains due under the guaranteed loan, C can proceed against either D or (after any requisite notice) S.
(2) If D and S are both wound up, C can prove in both liquidations and hope to receive a dividend in both, subject to not recovering in all more than 100p in the pound.
(3) S’s liquidator can prove in D’s liquidation (under an express or implied right of indemnity) only if S has paid C in full (so that C drops out of the matter and S stands in its place).
(4) As a corollary of (3) above, S’s liquidator cannot prove in D’s liquidation in any way that is in competition with C; though S has a contingent claim against D (in the event of C being paid off by S), S may not make that claim if it has not in fact paid off C.
“The situation in (2) above is what insolvency practitioners call a ‘double-dip’, which is permissible; the situation in (4) above is the simplest case of what would be double proof, which is not permissible.
“So far as the basis of the rule needs (or indeed allows of) further explanation it is that the surety’s contingent claim is not regarded as an independent, free-standing debt, but only as a reflection of the ‘real’ debt – that in respect of the money which the principal creditor had loaned to the principal debtor.”
1 Citers


 
Morris and Others -v- Agrichemicals Ltd and Others Times, 08 January 1996
8 Jan 1996
CA

Insolvency
No mandatory set off on liquidation without the requirement for mutuality.
Insolvency Rules 1986 4.90

 
Regina -v- Redbridge Magistrates Ex Parte Guppy Ind Summary, 05 February 1996
5 Feb 1996
QBD

Insolvency, Criminal Sentencing, Local Government
Justices could find a wilful refusal to pay a debt despite the defendant's assets having become vested in his Trustee on bankruptcy.

 
Regina -v- Secretary of State for Social Security, Ex parte Taylor and Chapman Times, 05 February 1996; [1997] BPIR 505
5 Feb 1996
ChD
Keene J
Benefits, Insolvency
The applicants were in turn the recipient of a Social Fund loan and a claimant who had been overpaid benefit. Both were later declared bankrupt. The Secretary of State then began to recover the loan and overpayment by deduction from their current benefits. They argued that he was unable to do so because of section 285(3) of the 1986 Act: that the right of deduction was a "remedy against the property or person of the bankrupt in respect of that debt". Held: Their entitlement was only to the net amount of benefit after deduction of the loan or overpayment and not to the full amount.
Insolvency Act 1986 285(3)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
In Re William Pickles Plc Times, 13 February 1996
13 Feb 1996
ChD

Insolvency
Single originating application for receivership can cover more than one company.

 
In Re A Company (No 62 of 1995) Times, 15 February 1996
15 Feb 1996
ChD

Insolvency
Contributory's petition to wind up was not to be advertised before return date.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925)

 
In Re A Debtor (No 214 Sd of 1995) Times, 15 February 1996
15 Feb 1996
ChD

Insolvency
Dismissal of application to set aside statutory demand is not a judgment.


 
 Hindcastle Ltd -v- Barbara Attenborough Associates Ltd and Others; HL 22-Feb-1996 - Gazette, 27 March 1996; Times, 23 February 1996; [1997] AC 70; [1996] 1 All ER 737; [1996] 2 WLR 262; [1996] BPIR 595; [1996] 1 EGLR 94; [1996] 2 BCLC 234; [1996] NPC 28; [1996] UKHL 19; [1996] BCC 636; [1996] 15 EG 103; [1996] EG 32
 
Sheppard and Cooper Ltd -v- TSB Bank Plc and Others Gazette, 27 March 1996; Times, 06 March 1996
6 Mar 1996
CA

Banking, Insolvency
A contract not to appoint the investigators of a company's difficulties subsequently as receivers is to be enforced.

 
In Re A Bankrupt (No 400 of 1995) Times, 22 March 1996
22 Mar 1996
ChD

Insolvency
The use of the largest creditor's solicitors to collect difficult debts did not create a conflict of interest.

 
Morris and Others -v- Lewis and Another Times, 29 March 1996
29 Mar 1996
ChD

Insolvency
Powers to deal with receivers remuneration are to be read as a whole and widely.
Insolvency Act 1986 35

 
March Estates Plc -v- Gunmark Ltd Times, 01 April 1996
1 Apr 1996
ChD

Insolvency
Insolvency procedure not intended to protect third parties from debts still due.
Insolvency Act 1986 1

 
Anderson -v- Hyde and Others Times, 02 May 1996; [1996] 2 BCLC 144
2 May 1996
CANI

Insolvency, Northern Ireland, Costs
The defendant company was wound up after the receiver had been appointed and the liquidator declined to take over the defence to the action. The judge had refused an application for a third party costs order against the receivers. Held: Had the defence been taken over by the liquidator the costs of the claimant would have ranked in priority to the claims of ordinary unsecured creditors, and it would not be just and equitable for a receiver to be able to defend the action without any liability for costs whatever the outcome. A receiver of a company taking over the defence of a case is liable in costs as a party, but is entitled to an indemnity.
1 Citers



 
 In Re Focus Insurance Co Ltd; ChD 6-May-1996 - Times, 06 May 1996
 
Trustee of the Property of F C Jones & Sons (A Firm) -v- Jones Gazette, 22 May 1996; Times, 13 May 1996; [1997] Ch. 159
13 May 1996
CA
Miller LJ
Insolvency, Equity
A bankruptcy order was made in 1984. Under the 1914 Act the trustee in bankruptcy got title to all the assets of the bankrupt as of the date of the act of bankruptcy. So, the trustee owned the partnership assets. The wife drew £11,700 out of those assets and invested in potato futures. By November 1984, she had made £50,000 using that money. The trustee sought to recover that sum. Held: It was the fruit of his money. A trustee in bankruptcy was entitled to an account of profits of investments withheld from him.
Bankruptcy Act 1914
1 Citers



 
 In Re Edennote Ltd; Tottenham Hotspur plc -v- Ryman; CA 21-May-1996 - Times, 03 June 1996; Gazette, 03 July 1996; [1996] 2 BCLC 389
 
Ex P Creditnet Ltd Times, 22 May 1996
22 May 1996
ChD

Insolvency
Insolvency petitions are not to be provided en masse for resale to the public.
Insolvency Rules 1986 7.28

 
In Re A Bankrupt (No 622 of 1995) Times, 27 June 1996
27 Jun 1996
ChD

Insolvency
One partner may be bankrupted despite an arrangement with the other partner to pay.

 
Khan -v- Official Receiver Times, 16 July 1996
16 Jul 1996
CA

Insolvency
A trustee in bankruptcy is under no obligation to accept an only but derisory offer.

 
Hardy -v- Focus Insurance Co (In Liquidation) Times, 19 July 1996; [1997] BPIR 77
19 Jul 1996
ChD

Insolvency
The Court has no power to direct the Official Receiver as to suspension of bankruptcy.
Insolvency Act 1986 303(1) 303(2)
1 Citers



 
 Bank of Credit and Commerce International Sa (In Liquidation) -v- Al-Saud; CA 12-Aug-1996 - Times, 12 August 1996

 
 Bank of Credit and Commerce International Sa (In Liquidation) (No 8); CA 2-Oct-1996 - Gazette, 02 October 1996; [1996] Ch 245

 
 The New Hampshire Insurance Company -v- Rush & Tompkins Group Plc, Rush & Tompkins International Limited; CA 3-Oct-1996 - [1996] EWCA Civ 634
 
Metalloy Supplies Ltd (In Liquidation) -v- MA (UK) Ltd Times, 12 December 1996; [1997] 1 WLR 1613; [1996] EWCA Civ 670; [1996] EWCA Civ 671
7 Oct 1996
CA
Millet LJ
Insolvency, Costs
A costs order against liquidator of company in litigation is only rarely to be given. The court should ask who is the 'real' party to the litigation: "[An order] may be made in a wide variety of circumstances where the third party is considered to be the real party interested in the outcome of the suit ... It is not, however, sufficient to render a director liable for costs that he was a director of the company and caused it to bring or defend proceedings which he funded and which ultimately failed. Where such proceedings are brought bona fide and for the benefit of the company, the company is the real plaintiff. If in such a case an order for costs could be made against a director in the absence of some impropriety or bad faith on his part, the doctrine of the separate liability of the company would be eroded and the principle that such orders should be exceptional would be nullified. The position of a liquidator is a fortiori. Where a limited company is in insolvent liquidation, the liquidator is under a statutory duty to collect in its assets. This may require him to bring proceedings. ... If he brings the proceedings in the name of the company, the company is the real plaintiff and he is not. He is under no obligation to the defendant to protect his interests by ensuring that he has sufficient funds in hand to pay their costs as well as his own if the proceedings fail."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
In Re BCCI Sa (In Liquidation) (No 9) Times, 08 October 1996
8 Oct 1996
ChD

Insolvency
The court cannot simply disapply rules, including and particularly those allowing set off in insolvency cases.
Insolvency Rules 1986 4.90

 
Botham -v- TSB Bank Plc [1996] EWCA Civ 778
21 Oct 1996
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Re NP Engineering and Security Products Ltd; Official Receiver & Another -v- Pafundo and Another [1996] EWCA Civ 782; [1998] 1 BCLC 208
22 Oct 1996
CA
Simon Brown, Waite, Morritt LJ
Litigation Practice, Company, Insolvency
The official receiver began director disqualification proceedings, but before the proceedings commenced, the company was wound up. Where, on an application for the disqualification of a director, the official receiver and the Secretary of State became aware that the company had in fact already been dissolved, the normal course would be to transfer the proceedings from the County Court to the High Court and to substitute the Secretary of State as applicant in the place of the official receiver.
The court gave guidance on the application of section 42(1)(b) of the 1984 Act, saying: "provided proceedings are started within the time permitted by the statute of limitations, are not frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of the process of the court and disclose a cause of action, they will not as a rule be struck out because of some mistake in procedure on the part of the plaintiff or his advisers . . No injustice is involved to the defendant in transferring an action which has been started in the wrong court to the correct court."
County Courts Act 1984 40 42(1)(b) - Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 6 - Insolvency Act 1986 205(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In the Matter of Austintel Limited Gazette, 20 November 1996; Times, 11 November 1996; [1996] EWCA Civ 844
31 Oct 1996
CA

Insolvency
A judge's refusal to allow the inspection of insolvency records is unappealable.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925) 7.28
[ Bailii ]
 
New Hampshire Insurance Company and others (Insurers) -v- MGN Limited and others: Maxwell Communication Corporation Plc (In Administration) and others (Insurers) -v- New Hampshire Insurance Company and others [1996] EWCA Civ 838
31 Oct 1996
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Trevor William Dixon -v- Peter O'Hara (the Trustee of the Estate of Trevor William Dixon a Bankrupt); Ronald William Dixon and Joan Dixon [1996] EWCA Civ 861
31 Oct 1996
CA

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

Insolvency Act 1986 375(1)
[ Bailii ]

 
 Independent Pension Trustee Ltd -v- L A W Construction Co Ltd and Others; OHCS 1-Nov-1996 - Times, 01 November 1996
 
Barclays Bank Plc -v- Michael John Collins [1996] EWCA Civ 910
8 Nov 1996
CA

Insolvency
Application for leave to appeal against bankruptcy order.
[ Bailii ]
 
In Re Landau (A Bankrupt) Times, 01 January 1997; Gazette, 29 January 1997; [1998] Ch 223
1 Dec 1996
ChD
Ferris J
Insolvency
At the date of the bankruptcy the bankrupt was entitled to a pension, payable in the future on his attaining the age of 65 years. He was aged 61 when the bankruptcy order was made, and 64 when it was discharged. The trustee claimed to be entitled to elect under the policy to commute part of the annuity for a tax free lump sum; and to take that lump sum and the reduced annuity as part of the bankrupt's estate. Held: Pension benefits payable after a bankrupt's discharge were not 'after acquired'. Both the cash lump sum and the continuing annuity payable under a retirement annuity contract were property of the bankrupt which vested automatically in the trustee in bankruptcy under the Insolvency Act 1986. he `bundle of contractual rights' under the pension policy to which the bankrupt had been entitled at the commencement of the bankruptcy fell within the description `things in action . . whether present or future or vested or contingent'; and so had to be regarded as within the definition of `property' in section 436 IA 1986. It was immaterial that the policy was not in payment at the commencement of the bankruptcy. At the commencement of the bankruptcy the bankrupt had a present right to require the pension provider to make payments under the policy in the future. It was that right - and the associated rights to elect when payments should commence - which formed part of the bankrupt's estate.
Insolvency Act 1986 306
1 Citers


 
Practice Direction (Companies Court: Provisional Liquidator) Times, 05 December 1996
5 Dec 1996
ChD

Insolvency
Applications for appointment of provisional liquidator to be heard by judge.


 
 Nelson -v- Nelson; CA 6-Dec-1996 - Gazette, 15 January 1997; Times, 08 January 1997; [1996] EWCA Civ 1140; [1997] 1 WLR 233; [1997] 1 All ER 979

 
 McMeechan -v- Secretary of State for Employment; CA 11-Dec-1996 - [1996] EWCA Civ 1166; [1997] IRLR 353; [1997] ICR 549
 
Commissioners for Customs and Excise -v- Katz [1996] EWCA Civ 1204
13 Dec 1996
CA

Insolvency
Leave to appeal.
[ Bailii ]
 
Alipour -v- UOC Corporation; Golam Reza Alipour -v- Fereshteh Ary and Alexander Schweininger Times, 18 December 1996; [1996] EWCA Civ 1229; [1997] 2 BCLC 770; [1997] 1 WLR 534
17 Dec 1996
CA
McGowan LJ, Sir Peter Gibson, Hutchison LJ
Insolvency, Company
The petitioner appealed against rejection of his contributor's winding up petition. Held: The Companies court was the appropriate place to determine a dispute on winding up petition. A dispute on locus standi can be dealt with in the winding-up proceedings without necessitating a stay of the petition, provided that the petition is not likely to cause substantial damage or inconvenience to the company.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Tager -v- Westpac Banking Corporation and Others Times, 24 December 1996; [1997] 1 BCLC 313
24 Dec 1996
ChD

Insolvency
A court has the power to extend the time allowed for a challenge to a voluntary arrangement.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (SI 1986 No 1925) 4.218(1) 4.220(1)
1 Citers


 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.