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: 1999 To: 1999

This page lists 72 cases, and was prepared on 08 August 2015.

 
Re A Debtor (No.488 IO of 1996), JP -v- A Debtor [1999] 2 BCLC 571
1999
ChD
Sir John Vinelott
Insolvency, Family
The debtor had been ordered to pay his wife a sum by way of ancillary relief in matrimonial proceedings. He then proposed an IVA, which was approved at a creditors meeting. W had notice but did not attend. She along with all other creditors was to receive a part payment in full and final settlement. She applied to revoke the approval. Held. She succeeded. She wife had a right not enjoyed by other creditors namely the freedom to assert her claim following the husband's bankruptcy notwithstanding the husband's discharge which right would be overreached if she was compelled to accept a dividend under the IVA in full and final settlement of her entitlement. She had been unfairly prejudiced to the extent that her special position had not been recognised.
Insolvency Act 1986 262
1 Citers


 
Osborne -v- Cole [1999] BPIR 251
1999

Registrar Baister
Insolvency
A person who challenges a bankrupt's trustee's conduct under section 303 must show that the trustee is acting "in bad faith or so perversely that no trustee properly advised or properly instructing himself could so have acted, alternatively if he has acted fraudulently or in a manner so unreasonable and absurd that no reasonable trustee would have acted in that way".
Insolvency Act 1986 303
1 Citers


 
In re Mark One (Oxford Street) plc [1999] 1 WLR 1445
1999

Jacob J
Insolvency

1 Citers


 
Bishopsgate Investment Limited -v- Maxwell [1999] Ch 1
1999
CA
Dillon LJ
Insolvency
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 the law to deal adequately with dishonesty or malpractice on the part of bankrupts or company directors…That was a matter of public concern, and there is a public interest in putting it right. As steps to that end, Parliament has, by [the Insolvency Act 1986], greatly extended the investigative powers available to office-holders, with the assistance of the court, and has expressly placed the officers of the company and others listed in section 235(3), under a duty to assist the office-holder". As to the Bishopsgate and Riley cases: "The essence of both decisions is that if Parliament, in the public interest, sets up by statute special investigatory procedures to find out if the affairs of a company have been conducted fraudulently, with the possibility of special remedies in the light of an inspector's report, or to find out if there have been infringements of certain sections of the Banking Act 1987 which have been enacted for the protection of members of the public who make deposits, Parliament cannot have intended that anyone questioned under those procedures should be entitled to rely on the privilege against self-incrimination, since that would stultify the procedures and prevent them achieving their obvious purpose."
Insolvency Act 1986 236
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
In re Equity Nominees Ltd [1999] 2 BCLC 19
1999


Insolvency
When reviewing an order the same approach should be was applied on the original hearing namely "whether the convening of a creditors' meeting as required under the Insolvency Rules would serve any useful purpose"
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925)


 
 Upton -v- Taylor and Colley; 1999 - [1999] BPIR 168
 
Hope -v- Premierpace (Europe) Ltd [1999] BPIR 695
1999

Rimer J
Insolvency
A claim for an account and payment was not one for debt which could form the subject of a statutory demand.
1 Citers


 
In Re H S Smith and Sons Times, 06 January 1999
6 Jan 1999
ChD

Insolvency
A partnership, itself insolvent, could benefit from an administration order, though one of the partners personally had assets which could cover the debts. The test was the present inability of the firm to pay its debts, and the purpose was to save the firm.

 
In Re Continental Assurance Company of London Plc (In Liquidation) (2) Gazette, 10 February 1999; Times, 14 January 1999
14 Jan 1999
ChD

Insurance, Insolvency, Company
The rules are intended to provide a comprehensive and unitary scheme of management of company liquidations, and in voluntary liquidation, the date of the resolution commencing the dissolution is to be used as the date of the winding up order.
Insurance Companies (Winding Up) Rules 1985 95 L2


 
 In Re Thirty-Eight Building Ltd; ChD 14-Jan-1999 - Times, 14 January 1999
 
In Re Latreefers Inc Times, 18 January 1999
18 Jan 1999
ChD

Insolvency
In order for a dismissal or adjournment of a winding up petition pending adjudication of a cross claim the company must show a genuine and serious complaint and that there had been some reason for any delay in litigating the claim.

 
In Re Richbell Information Services Inc Times, 21 January 1999
21 Jan 1999
ChD

Insolvency
A petition for the winding up of a company where that company appeared to have a substantial cross claim which might set off and exceed the debt on which it was based, might go ahead where the interests of the company and the creditors might so better be protected.

 
Barclays Bank Plc -v- John Harold Henson Peter Edward Stapleton Second [1999] EWCA Civ 694
2 Feb 1999
CA

Banking, Insolvency

[ Bailii ]

 
 In Re Park Air Services Plc; Christopher Moran Holdings Ltd -v- Bairstow and Another; HL 4-Feb-1999 - Times, 05 February 1999; [1999] UKHL 2; [2000] 2 AC 172; [1999] 1 All ER 673; [1999] 2 WLR 396; [2000] ANZ Conv R 174; [1999] 1 EGLR 1; [1999] 1 BCLC 155
 
Rooney (As Trustee In Bankruptcy of the Estate of Cardona) -v- Cardona; Black Horse Life Assurance Company Limited; Black Horse Financial Services Group Limited and Lloyds Bank Plc [1999] EWCA Civ 745
9 Feb 1999
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]

 
 In Re M (A Debtor) (488-Io of 1996); ChD 10-Feb-1999 - Gazette, 03 March 1999; Times, 10 February 1999

 
 Gardner -v- Whelan and J Whelan (Trading As WT Construction) and Official Receiver; CA 15-Feb-1999 - [1999] EWCA Civ 787
 
The Official Receiver -v- John Brunt, Paul Derek Silver, Nigel Howard Nugent [1999] EWCA Civ 879
2 Mar 1999
CA

Insolvency, Company, Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Rooney -v- Cardona and Others Times, 04 March 1999
4 Mar 1999
CA

Wills and Probate, Insolvency
A joint life first death policy had been paid out to a bankrupt surviving husband. Since the policy was taken out for the benefit of the spouse under the Act, the husband received it in his capacity as a beneficiary and not as a trustee and he could not give good receipt for the proceeds.
Married Women's Property Act 1882 11


 
 Greet and Greet -v- Rilett (Trustee In Bankruptcy of M Greet); CA 11-Mar-1999 - [1999] EWCA Civ 953
 
Raja -v- Rubin & Another Times, 14 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1039; [1999] 3 All ER 72
19 Mar 1999
CA

Insolvency, Costs
Having waived his right to a dividend under a voluntary arrangement, a creditor could not object to its later variation to include other creditors, despite an absence of explicit power in the deed for this purpose. Waiver should have been made explicit.
Insolvency Act 1986 263 (3)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Banco Nacional De Cuba -v- Cosmos Trading Corporation [1999] EWCA Civ 1047
22 Mar 1999
CA

Company, Insolvency
Appeal against refusal to order strike out of claim as abuse of process.
Insolvency Act 1986 220(1)
[ Bailii ]

 
 Ebert -v- Birch (Liquidator of Europride Limited) Midland Bank Plc and and Ralph, Rabonowicz; CA 30-Mar-1999 - [1999] EWCA Civ 1130; [1999] 3 WLR 670; [1999] EWCA Civ 3043; [2000] Ch 484; [2000] BPIR 14

 
 Hofer -v- Strawson; ChD 31-Mar-1999 - Gazette, 31 March 1999; [1999] 2 BCLC 336
 
Anthony Archer; Richard William Wells -v- Nr Lyle (Male) and D L Morgan (Male) (Sued As Administrative Receivers of Dialatron Group Plc) [1999] EWCA Civ 1195
19 Apr 1999
CA

Employment, Insolvency

[ Bailii ]

 
 Glenister -v- Rowe; CA 21-Apr-1999 - Gazette, 19 May 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1221; [2000] Ch 76
 
Greeves (The ) -v- Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Limited and Mercantile Credit Company Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 1234
22 Apr 1999
CA

Company, Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
UCB Corporate Services Limited -v- David and Muriel Emery [1999] EWCA Civ 1310
29 Apr 1999
CA

Insolvency
Application for permission to appeal and an extension of time for appealing.
[ Bailii ]
 
In Re Lomax Leisure Ltd Times, 04 May 1999; Gazette, 26 May 1999
4 May 1999
ChD

Landlord and Tenant, Insolvency
A landlord may exercise a right of peaceable re-entry without court action after his tenant company went into administration. It was not the enforcement of a security so as to be restricted by insolvency legislation.
Insolvency Act 1986 10(1)

 
In Re Wilmott Trading Ltd Gazette, 06 May 1999
6 May 1999
ChD

Insolvency
The continued ownership of a waste disposal licence was not a bar to the completion of the liquidation of the company provided the liquidator could show ability to comply with the statutory requirements for the licence.
Insolvency Act 1986 106(1) 201(2)

 
In the Matter of Fremanco Properties Limited and In the Matter of Insolvency Act 1986 Leonard Edward Scruton -v- Treasury Solicitor [1999] EWCA Civ 1370
10 May 1999
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Patrick Joseph Cullinane -v- Inland Revenue [1999] EWCA Civ 1429
18 May 1999
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Malcolm Robert Ross (a Bankrupt) -v- Stonewood Securities Plc and Official Receiver [1999] EWCA Civ 1448
20 May 1999
CA
Nourse, Clarke LJJ
Insolvency
Appeal against confirmation of bankruptcy order.
Bankruptcy Act 1914 69
[ Bailii ]
 
Rooney -v- Cardona and Another Times, 24 May 1999
24 May 1999
ChD

Insolvency
The trustee in bankruptcy had absolute priority for payment of his fees, costs, charges and disbursements only until the point where the bankrupts assets were transferred to a supervisor of a subsequent voluntary arrangement.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925) 5.21.2

 
Medforth -v- Blake and others Gazette, 16 June 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1482; [2000] Ch 86; [1999] 3 All ER 97
26 May 1999
CA
Sir Richard Scott V-C
Equity, Insolvency
A receiver appointed to manage a business had duties over and above those of mere good faith. A receiver who failed to obtain discounts normally obtainable for supplies to the business might be liable for that failure. when considering the position of a receiver and manager appointed by a mortgagee to run a business, ‘The proposition that, in managing and carrying on the mortgaged business, the receiver owed the mortgagor no duty other than that of good faith offends, in my opinion commercial sense. The receiver is not obliged to carry on the business. He can decide not to do so. He can decide to close it down. In taking these decisions he is entitled, and perhaps bound, to have regard to the interests of the mortgagee in obtaining repayment of the secured debt. Provided he acts in good faith, he is entitled to sacrifice the interests of the mortgagor in pursuit of that end.
The mortgagee or receiver, when exercising the power of sale, must therefore act in good faith with a view to securing repayment of the debt by the conversion of the security into money. The timing of the sale will be a matter for them, unaffected by the wishes of the mortgagor. But the preparation for and the method of sale to be adopted will be matters in respect of which there is no conflict between the interests of the mortgagor and the mortgagee, and where the mortgagee or receiver will be potentially liable to the mortgagor if he fails to act with reasonable care so as to obtain a proper price. In this context it is clear that the property must be fairly and properly exposed to the market, absent perhaps cases of real urgency. Similarly, as part of this duty of care, the receiver may be required to take positive steps to maintain the value of the property. . . . the mortgagee or a receiver appointed by him is required to incur expense in the improvement of the security in order to sell it at a higher price or to embark on making applications for planning permission, granting leases or the like, which, however well-founded, are likely to delay a sale beyond the normal period of marketing."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Dora -v- Simper and Others Times, 26 May 1999
26 May 1999
ChD

Insolvency
A creditor's claim to set aside an insolvent debtor's transaction as being at an undervalue could not be pursued to benefit that creditor alone, and a plaintiff was not entitled to his full judgment and costs. A conspiracy claim was hard to establish.
Insolvency Act 1986 423

 
Cadogan Estates Ltd -v- Roderick Joseph McMahon Times, 01 June 1999; Gazette, 03 June 1999; Gazette, 09 June 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1470
9 Jun 1999
CA
Stuart-Smith and Laws L.JJ. and Jonathan Parker J.)
Landlord and Tenant, Housing, Insolvency
A provision in a tenancy agreement that the tenancy would cease upon the bankruptcy of the tenant, continued and became part of the terms of a statutory tenancy following the contractual one. The provision was not inconsistent with the idea of the statutory tenancy, and the term was implied into the statutory tenancy.
Rent Act 1977 98(1)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Deloitte & Touche Ag -v- Johnson and Another; PC 10-Jun-1999 - Times, 16 June 1999; [1999] UKPC 25; Appeal No 44 of 1998; [1999] 1 WLR 1605; (1998-99) 1 ITELR 771; [1999] BCC 992; [2000] 1 BCLC 485
 
Mond and Another -v- Hammond Suddards and Another Times, 18 June 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1586
15 Jun 1999
CA
Chadwick LJ
Insolvency
The court does not have power to order the payment of a liquidator's costs which had not been properly incurred. The costs of unsuccessful litigation were not recoverable in priority to a secured creditor in priority to the charge. As to rule 7.47(1) of the Rules: "But, since the point has been raised and may be of importance in other contexts, it is appropriate that I indicate that I can see no basis why the words used in rule 7.47(1) should not be given the very wide effect which, as a matter of language, the meaning which they naturally bear would indicate that the rule-making body intended. The rule is in terms which are indistinguishable from the parallel provision applicable in bankruptcy: see section 375(1) of the Insolvency Act 1986; and, in that context, there is no reason to doubt that Parliament intended to preserve the unlimited jurisdiction to conduct a rehearing which, as Sir James Bacon C.J. observed in Ex parte Keighley; In re Wike (1874) L.R. 9 Ch.App. 668n., was "of very considerable antiquity" and which had been enshrined in successive Bankruptcy Acts: see section 71 of the Act of 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), section 104(1) of the Act of 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52) and section 108(1) of the Act of 1914. As Hoffmann J. pointed out in In re Calmex Ltd. [1989] 1 All E.R. 485, 486, the power is expressed in completely general terms. But, although I would hold that, as a matter of jurisdiction, the power to review conferred by rule 7.47(1) is unfettered, it is, of course, a power which is to be exercised judicially. It would, in my view, be inappropriate - save in the most exceptional circumstances - for a judge to exercise that power in order to substitute his own decision for that of another judge of co-ordinate jurisdiction reached on the same material after a full consideration of the arguments. The power to review is not to be used in order to hear an appeal against a judge of co-ordinate jurisdiction. The exercise of the power should be confined, as a matter of discretion, to cases in which there has been some change in circumstances (which may, perhaps, include the consideration of material which was not previously before the court) since the original order was made: see the observations of Millett J. in In re A Debtor (No. 32-SD-1991) [1993] 1 W.L.R. 314, 318-319."
Insolvency Act 1986 127
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In Re Wilmott Trading Ltd (No 2) Times, 17 June 1999; Gazette, 27 June 1999; Gazette, 30 June 1999
17 Jun 1999
ChD

Insolvency
A waste management licence is not property. On the dissolution of a company, the licence simply ceased to exist. Nothing remained which was capable of vesting in the Crown in bona vacantia. Such a licence could not be managed or regulated properly by the Environmental Agency.
Companies Act 1985 654

 
Garrow -v- Society of Lloyd's Times, 18 June 1999; [1999] BPIR 668
18 Jun 1999
ChD
Jacob J
Land, Insolvency
Lloyds sought to claim against the Names on a 'pay now, sue later' clause. Held: The power to order a stay of execution for possession remained and could be exercised in an appropriate case even though a cross-claim under which it was requested, could have been raised at an earlier stage in the proceedings. There was no hard rule of law to prevent such a request.
Jacob J said: "The other point urged upon me was the 'pay now sue later' clause. Mr Garrow had agreed that if he was to bring a cross claim he would nonetheless pay the claim at once. This is of course true, and if he had the means then I have no doubt that he should be made to do so. But I am concerned with whether the draconian effect of the bankruptcy should be imposed when he may have a perfectly good cross claim. It seems to me that this would be disproportionate, given the fact that with the Commercial Court decision likely soon, there is no tangible benefit to be had."
1 Citers


 
Gwembe Valley Development Company Limited (In Receivership) -v- Thomas Koshy; Lummus Agricultural Services Company Limited; Warrant Trustees Limited Sued As Trustees of Palm Trust; Haze Securities Limited; Centel Limited; Hi-Pro Holdings Limited; Hi-Pro ( [1999] EWCA Civ 1628
21 Jun 1999
CA

Insolvency, Litigation Practice

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Demite Limited -v- Protec Health Limited; Dayman and Gilbert [1999] EWCA Civ 1668
24 Jun 1999
CA

Insolvency, Company

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
In Re Grey Martin Ltd Times, 29 June 1999
29 Jun 1999
ChD

Insolvency
The remuneration of a provisional liquidator takes precedence over the costs and expenses of a liquidator. Accordingly the expenses of the provisional liquidator for VAT, and PAYE and National Insurance take a similar priority over later costs of a liquidator.
Insolvency Rules 1986 4.218(1)(a)

 
In Re Dicksmith (Manufacturing) Ltd (In Liquidation) Times, 07 July 1999
7 Jul 1999
ChD

Insolvency
The power of a liquidator in voluntary liquidation proceedings, to apply to the court to be allowed to exercise powers normally reserved to a liquidator appointed by the court, extended beyond matters such as litigation to protect assets and ensure pari passu distribution among creditors. The power could also be used to allow an application to stay proceedings.
Insolvency Act 1986 112

 
A E Reynolds Plc -v- Raymond Pratt; Carol Pratt and Leonard John Arboine [1999] EWCA Civ 1785
8 Jul 1999
CA

Land, Insolvency, Trusts

[ Bailii ]

 
 Mann and others -v- Secretary of State for Employment; HL 8-Jul-1999 - Times, 19 July 1999; [1999] UKHL 29; [1999] ICR 898
 
Official Receiver As Liquidator of Celtic Extraction Ltd and Bluestone Chemicals Ltd -v- Environmental Agency [1999] EWCA Civ 1835; [2001] Ch 475
14 Jul 1999
CA

Insolvency
A waste management licence is "property" for the purposes of the Act.
Insolvency Act 1986
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Phyllis Adegun Lee -v- Gerald Lee (a Bankrupt); Camden Hill Developments Limited; Woolwich Building Society; Allied Irish Bank Plc and Anthony Peter Supperstone (Trustee In Bankruptcy of Gerald Lee) [1999] EWCA Civ 1836
14 Jul 1999
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry -v- Walden, Kealfreight Ltd EAT/905/98; [1999] UKEAT 905_98_0107; [2000] IRLR 168
22 Jul 1999
EAT
His Honour Judge Peter Clark
Employment, Insolvency
EAT Insolvent Employer - The onus is on the applicant seeking payment for lost wages from the Secretary of state to establish that the employer company is insolvent. There must be proof of the occurring of an event falling within section 183(3)
EAT Insolvency - (no sub-topic)
Employment Rights Act 1996 183(3)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ EAT ]

 
 Lightfoot -v- The Lord Chancellor; CA 23-Jul-1999 - [1999] EWCA Civ 3025; [2000] HRLR 33; [2000] QB 597; [2000] BPIR 120; [1999] 4 All ER 583; [2000] BCC 537; [2000] 2 WLR 318
 
Malcolm Robert Ross (a Bankrupt) -v- Stonewood Securities Plc and Official Receiver [1999] EWCA Civ 2000
28 Jul 1999
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
James Masters; Steven Mark Ripley and Douglas Fugate -v- Jonathan Victor Leaver [1999] EWCA Civ 2016
29 Jul 1999
CA

International, Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Trident International Limited -v- Barlow; Hughes and Goodman (the Joint Administrators of Hamley Plc and Jeffrey (Rogers) Imports Limited [1999] EWCA Civ 2061; [2000] BCC 602
30 Jul 1999
CA
Henry LJ, Mummery LJ, Chadwick LJ
Insolvency, Company
A contractual possessory lien, coupled with a right to sell and use the proceeds to discharge the customer's outstanding indebtedness was not a floating charge because the company did not purport to have any right to exercise any right to take possession as distinct from the right to detain possession
Insolvency Act 1986 11(3)(c) - Companies Act 1985 395
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Inland Revenue Commissioners -v- Adam and Partners Ltd Times, 02 August 1999
2 Aug 1999
ChD

Insolvency
The nature of a scheme of arrangement was not closely defined, and an arrangement with creditors could be described as such even though it might give no prospect of a payout to the creditors. A voluntary arrangement approved by a majority of the creditors was binding on the Inland Revenue even though no dividend might become payable under it.

 
West Bromwich Building Society; Official Receiver -v- K H Pre-Set Tools Limited and Kenneth Aubrey Joseph Head [1999] EWCA Civ 2064
3 Aug 1999
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Official Receiver -v- Environment Agency Times, 05 August 1999
5 Aug 1999
CA

Environment, Insolvency
A waste management licence could constitute both property and onerous property for the purposes of the Insolvency Act. It could also be an interest incidental to the land to which it related. Because of this the liquidator of a waste management company could disclaim the licence without committing an offence under the Act.
Environmental Protection Act 1990 33 34 - Insolvency Act 1986 178(3), 436

 
Regina -v- Lord Chancellor, ex parte Lightfoot Times, 18 August 1999; Gazette, 11 August 1999
18 Aug 1999
CA

Insolvency, Constitutional
A debtor does not have a right, under the constitution to participate in any scheme for the relief of debt. Accordingly it was not ultra vires for the Lord Chancellor to provide no discretion on the payment of court fees by an intending applicant for bankruptcy. Such fees were used toward the administration of the applicant's affairs.
Insolvency Fees Order 1986 (1986 No 2030) 8(1) 9(b)

 
In Re Lee (A Bankrupt) Times, 22 August 1999
22 Aug 1999
CA

Insolvency
The court has sufficient discretion to order that the surplus proceeds of sale of a leasehold interest could be paid to the liquidator despite his having himself disclaimed any interest in the lease. Nobody else had claimed an interest, and the creditors should receive the benefit. This was sensible despite the apparent termination of the liquidator in the lease.
Insolvency Act 1986 320 315(3)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Masters and Others -v- Leaver Gazette, 02 September 1999; Times, 05 August 1999
2 Sep 1999
CA

Insolvency, International
A judgment obtained by default against a bankrupt in a foreign jurisdiction, was not sufficient evidence of itself, to establish that the debt which it proved had been obtained or created by fraud, or by a fraud to which they were a party. The party had been debarred from defending himself, and a finding on those terms could not mean that the debt should survive a bankruptcy here.
Insolvency Act 1986 281 (3)

 
Regina -v- McCredie; Regina -v- French Times, 05 October 1999
5 Oct 1999
CACD

Insolvency
The duty on company officers to disclose assets to the liquidator went beyond a duty to respond to requests, and created a positive duty to inform him of assets. Nor was the obligation to deliver up a once off event, but it was a duty continuing from time to time during the insolvency.
Insolvency Act 1986 208 (1)

 
Kerry Foods Ltd -v- A Creber & others Gazette, 03 February 2000; [2000] IRLR 10; EAT/1379/97; [1999] UKEAT 1379_97_1110; EAT/939/98
11 Oct 1999
EAT
The Honourable Mr Justice Morison (President)
Employment, Insolvency
Where a receiver of a company dismissed the employees and then transferred the business to a purchaser, that amounted to an unfair dismissal because it was a TUPE transfer, even though the manufacturing base also moved. The company was liable to the employees. Neither whether there was an economic technical or organisational reason nor the unfairness of the dismissal arose.
EAT Transfer of Undertakings - Transfer
Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 (1981 No 1794)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ EATn ]
 
Smith -v- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Times, 15 October 1999; Gazette, 10 November 1999
15 Oct 1999
EAT
Morison J
Human Rights, Insolvency, Employment
The claimant had been sole director of a company which went into liquidation. He sought a redundancy payment from the respondent under the 1996 Act. It was refused. The tribunal had applied Buchan. It had refused to hear an argument that the tribunal chairman was also employed by the respondent and could not therefore be independent. Held: Although the Human Rights Act was not yet in force, when looking at a case which would be reheard after it has come into effect, it is right to allow for the Act. Article 6 of the Convention allows a fair trial, yet in this case, the bankrupt's representative, and the tribunal hearing his case were both indirectly employees of the respondent. As a bankrupt, the claimant's affairs were managed by the Official Reciver, again an employee of the respondent. The appellant should have been given chance to argue the point before the tribunal. In any event that fact that the claimant was a controlling shareholder did not of itself disqualify him from being an employee and entitled to a redindancy payment. His appeal was allowed.
Human Rights Act 1998 - European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 6.1 - Employment Rights Act 1996 166
1 Cites



 
 In Re A Company (No 008174 of 1999); ChD 2-Nov-1999 - Times, 02 November 1999
 
In Re Norditrack (Uk) Ltd Times, 11 November 1999
11 Nov 1999
ChD
Arden J
Insolvency, Company
A voluntary winding up is deemed to take place when the resolution for it was passed. The practice of passing such a resolution to take effect only upon the revocation of an administration order was ineffective. The correct way was for an order regarding the administration to be made but held pending notification of the passing of the resolution by the company.
Insolvency Act 1986 86


 
 In Re ASRS Establishment Ltd (In Administrative Receivership and Liquidation); ChD 17-Nov-1999 - Times, 17 November 1999
 
In Re T & D Industries Plc and Another Times, 23 November 1999; Gazette, 01 December 1999
23 Nov 1999
ChD
Neuberger J
Insolvency, Company
An administrator appointed under the Act was free to dispose of a company's assets without first making an application to court for permission, and without first obtaining approval of his proposal from the creditors. The administrator's role would require difficult and sometimes urgent decisions.
Insolvency Act 1986 8(3)

 
Coutts & Co -v- Stock Times, 30 November 1999; Gazette, 17 December 1999; [1999] EWHC Ch 191
24 Nov 1999
ChD

Company, Insolvency, Banking
Where an ailing company continued to trade, section 127 operated as between the company and its directors and creditors, and not so as to invalidate payments made by the company's bank on cheques drawn before the date of presentation of the petition, and honoured before the date of the winding up order. Accordingly when an overdraft arose as a result of such payments, a person guaranteeing the company's overdraft remained liable for the result.
Insolvency Act 1986 127
[ Bailii ]
 
Holder and Others -v- APC Supperstone and Others Gazette, 08 December 1999; [2001] 1 All ER 473; [1999] EWHC Ch 189
24 Nov 1999
ChD

Land, Insolvency
Tenants obtained a charging order against their landlord, and, after his bankruptcy, incurred substantial costs defending their charge against other claimants. The trustee declined to allow payment of the costs. Held: The costs were properly payable under the Act. The charge operated also as an equitable charge, and such a charge would carry the costs of defending the chargee's rights. A charging order covers not only the judgment debt, but also future interest on the debt and "all costs charges and expenses reasonably and properly incurred in enforcing or preserving (the) security."
Charging Orders Act 1979 1(1) 3(4)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Biosource Technologies Inc -v- Axia Genetics Plc (In Administration) Times, 25 November 1999; Gazette, 25 November 1999
25 Nov 1999
ChD

Insolvency, Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property
The rule which prevents a company in administration being prosecuted without the leave of the court, was not intended only to restrict creditors. Here another company wanted to bring patent infringement proceedings, but were first to be required to obtain the court's consent.
Insolvency Act 1986 11(3)(d)

 
G. Everson and T.J. Barrass -v- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Bell Lines Ltd C-198/98; [1999] EUECJ C-198/98
16 Dec 1999
ECJ

European, Employment, Insolvency
Europa Where the employees adversely affected by the insolvency of their employer were employed in a Member State by the branch established in that State of a company incorporated under the laws of another Member State, where that company has its registered office and in which it was placed in liquidation, the competent institution, under Article 3 of Directive 80/987 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer, for payment to those employees of outstanding claims is that of the State within whose territory they were employed.
[ Europa ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Hollicourt (Contracts) Ltd (In Liquidation) -v- Bank of Ireland Times, 30 November 1999; Gazette, 17 December 1999
17 Dec 1999
ChD

Company, Insolvency, Banking
A company's account was in credit at all times, but was, unknown to the bank, in winding up proceedings. The bank continued to honour cheques, and was found to have been making dispositions of the company's assets under the section. Accordingly the payments were void and ineffective from the date of the commencement of the winding up.
Insolvency Act 1986 127
1 Cites

1 Citers


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