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: 2003 To: 2003

This page lists 54 cases, and was prepared on 08 August 2015.

 
Commissioners of Inland Revenue -v- Lee-Phipps [2003] BPIR 803
2003
ChD
Mr Launcelot Henderson QC
Insolvency
In a case where there had been no reasoned determination of the arguments at the earlier stage and the application had simply been struck out for a formal defect, then the principle referred to in Turner was not engaged.

 
Re Thoars (Dec'd); Reid -v- Ramlort Ltd [2003] EWHC 1999 (Ch); [2003] BPIR 1444
2003
ChD
Judge Norris QC
Insolvency, Wills and Probate
The company claimed the benefit of an insurance policy. They had paid certain premiums and the trustee had made a declaration that it was held on trust for the company. The insured died in Scotland, intestate and insolvent. Held: The declaration of trust was a transaction at an undervalue. The policy was held on trust to return the premiums to the company, with the balance upon trust for the deceased's insolvent estate.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Montgomery -v- Wanda Modes Ltd [2003] BPIR 457
2003
ChD
Park J
Insolvency
Park J said: "The requirement that the debtor must not have been able to litigate his . . cross-claim was not part of the ratio decidendi of Bayoil: in that case there was no dispute that, because (I infer) the whole dispute between the two parties was governed by an arbitration clause, the debtor had not been able to litigate its cross-claim. Therefore there was no issue on this particular point. So where does the proposition stated by Nourse LJ come from? I respectfully agree with Rimer J that there is no other case which establishes it. The wider principle enunciated in Bayoil was that a cross-claim could be a ground for dismissing a winding-up petition based on an undisputed debt. The court derived that principle largely from the decision of the same court in [Portman] . . [Portman] certainly did not decide that a debtor company could not rely on a cross-claim after all if it could have litigated it earlier but had not done so. If that had been the view of the court it would almost certainly have acceded to the winding up petition instead of dismissing it:
There has been only one other directly relevant Court of Appeal case after Portman and before Bayoil. It is [LHF Wools]. A winding up petition against the company was dismissed on the ground that it had a cross-claim which, if it succeeded, would exceed the debt. As in Bayoil there was no issue about the company having been able to litigate its cross-claim but not having done so. The cross-claim would have to be litigated in Belgium and under Belgian law could not yet have been commenced. The headnote does however contain these words
'. . the modern practice that where a company had a genuine and serious cross-claim against the petitioner which it had not reasonably been able to litigate, the petition should usually be stayed or dismissed'.
I think that, as Rimer J suggested, the words which I have emphasised are likely to have been the origin of the words in Nourse LJ's judgment which I am considering here. However, the problem is that there is nothing to support them in the judgment in the LHF Wools case. Although it was true that the company could not have litigated its cross-claim, none of the three members of the court says anything to suggest that that was important, or that the result would or might have been otherwise if the company could already have litigated its cross-claim. Indeed, Harman LJ said that the company appealed on the ground that 'according to modern practice if there is a genuine cross-claim, it is just as good as if there was a disputed debt', making no reference to whether or not the cross-claim could reasonably have been litigated already. I can only conclude that the headnote writer went beyond what the court had decided, and that his expansion may have found its way into the judgment of Nourse LJ in Bayoil.
In the circumstances I do not consider that I am bound by what Nourse LJ said to reject [the company's] argument on the ground that it could have litigated its cross-claim against [the petitioner] but had not done so. As a matter of principle I would not myself think it right to decide against [the company] on that ground. I do not think that there is anything objectionable in a company which believes that it has a claim against another party holding back from pursuing it, but then, if the other party starts to threaten it with winding-up proceedings if it does not pay a debt owed in the other direction, deciding that it must pursue its cross-claim after all. A decision in favour of [the petitioner] on this issue would have the undesirable effect of penalising a company for refraining from litigating an issue when it first could have done, and encouraging parties to litigate their possible claims sooner rather than later."
1 Citers


 
OT Computers -v- First National Tricity Finance [2003] EWHC 1010 (Ch); 2003 2369 A3
2003
ChD
Pumfrey J
Insolvency

1 Citers


 
In Re Independent Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) [2003] 1 BCLC 640
2003

Ferris J
Insolvency, Costs
Ferris J was required to consider the insolvency office-holders' remuneration, assisted by a solicitor with wide insolvency experience, whose report sets out the general principles then accepted by the insolvency profession as the yardstick for claiming remuneration in insolvency proceedings.
1 Citers


 
Edwards, Drummond Smith -v- Flightline Limited Times, 13 February 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 63; Gazette, 03 April 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 1200; [2003] 3 All ER 1200
5 Feb 2003
CA
Lord Justice Laws, Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Jonathon Parker
Insolvency
The applicant company obtained an injunction against another company. That freezing injunction was discharged upon the payment of a sum into the names of the respective parties' solicitors. The company went into liquidation, and the claimant disputed ownership of the sum with the provisional liquidators. Held: The deposit of the sum was insufficient to create a charge giving any priority for the claimant over the liquidators. An equitable charge could be created only if there had been not only a restriction on any disposal, but also an obligation to pay the debt out of the fund. The consent order under which the freezing order had been discharged could not be construed to create such an obligation.
Insolvency Act 1986 130(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Piacentini -v- Dayman [2003] EWHC 113 (Admin); [2003] 3 WLR 354
5 Feb 2003
QBD
The Hon Mr Justice Lightman
Insolvency
The reality of the agency of a receiver for a mortgagor is shown in the absence of personal liability of the receivers for tax in respect of receipts which come to the hands of the receivers as agents.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Commissioners of Customs and Excise -v- Allen Times, 20 March 2003
6 Feb 2003
ChD
Gilliland QC J
Insolvency
A block order had been made transferring the duties of an insolvency practitioner to another. In the case of an individual practitioner resigning, a creditor would have to be notified so as to be allowed to object. Here, the applicant sought a review of the transfer ordered by the court, having been notified after the event. Held: The applicant first had to show a locus standi, by showing that it was a creditor. The court would then ask if, if the objections had been made at the time, the order would still have been made. It should be approached as a rehearing rather than as an appeal. The issue might also be affected by whether the creditor complaining was a majority or minority creditor. Here, the objections were real, but the original practitioner could not be re-instated. The new appointments were discharged where the applicant had an interest.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925)

 
Brac Rent-A-Car International Inc Times, 24 February 2003; [2003] EWHC 114 (Ch); Gazette, 01 April 2003; [2003] 2 All ER 201
7 Feb 2003
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Lloyd
Insolvency, Jurisdiction, Company, European
The company was incorporated in Delaware. Its main centre of business was within the UK. The company resisted an attempt to wind the company up here. Held: The English courts had jurisdiction. The company's contracts were subject to English law, their employees were here, and their contracts also were under UK law. Whilst article 3 did not expressly extend its ambit to companies incorporated outside the EU, it should be read to do so, because its scope was defined primarily by reference to the area of operations of the company, and such an application was not excluded.
Council Regulation (EC) 1346/2000 3 - Insolvency Act 1986 8(7)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Marini Ltd, (The Liquidator of) -v- Dickenson and Others [2003] EWHC 334 (Ch)
3 Mar 2003
ChD
Richard Seymour QC J
Insolvency, Company

Insolvency Act 1986
[ Bailii ]
 
Geologistics Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Financial Services Compensation Scheme [2003] EWHC 629 (Admin)
4 Mar 2003
Admn

Insurance, Costs, Insolvency

Policyholder (Protection) Act 1975 6(4) 6(5)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Morphitis -v- Bernasconi and others Times, 12 March 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 289; Gazette, 15 May 2003
5 Mar 2003
CA
Aldous, Chadwick, LJJ Munby J
Insolvency, Company
The appellants had been directors of a company which fell into difficulties. A new company was begun, and traded, and the other continued for a year before being wound up by a landlord. The lease was disclaimed. Only the landlord lost out. He claimed that the directors had continued to trade with intent to defraud. The directors appealed. Held: The section required not just that the claimant had been defrauded, but also that that had been the intention of the directors. That was not established in this case.
Insolvency Act 1986 213 216 - Companies Act 1948 332(1)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Pozzuto, Di Iulio -v- Iacovides [2003] EWHC 431 (Ch)
7 Mar 2003
ChD
Mr Justice Lawrence Collins
Land, Insolvency, Trusts

[ Bailii ]
 
Grady -v- HM Prison Service [2003] EWCA Civ 527; Times, 18 April 2003; [2003] 3 All ER 745
11 Apr 2003
CA
Thorpe, Sedley LJJ, Richards J
Employment, Insolvency
The applicant appealed striking out of her employment claims against the respondent. She had been made bankrupt after lodging her appeal to the EAT, and the EAT had held that she lacked standing to pursue her claim. Held: Employment claims are in their essential nature personal and not proprietory, and did not vest in the trustee in bankruptcy. A claim for re-instatement or re-engagement and some of the compensation awards were not capable of being things in action, though the eventual fund created in any award might be. There is "no bright line" between personal rights of action and those which form part of a bankrupt's estate, but that all the reasoning in the authorities "tends to place on the non-vesting side of the line a claim which is primarily directed at the restoration of a contractual relationship in which the claimant's skill and labour are the essential commodity".
Employment Rights Act 1996 112 113 114 115 116 117
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Archer Structures Ltd -v- Griffiths [2003] EWHC 957 (Ch)
30 Apr 2003
Chd

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Archer Structures Limited -v- Christopher Griffiths [2003] EWHC 957 (Ch)
30 Apr 2003
ChD
Her Honour Judge Frances Kirkham
Insolvency

Insolvency Act 1986 216(3)


 
 T & N Limited, Associated Companies of T&N Ltd (In Administration) -v- Royal & Sun Alliance Plc, and others; ChD 9-May-2003 - [2003] EWHC 1016 (Ch)
 
In re The Salvage Association Times, 21 May 2003; Gazette, 19 June 2003; [2003] EWHC 1028 (Ch); [2004] 1 WLR 174
9 May 2003
ChD
Blackurn J
Company, Insolvency
The company wished to enter into a voluntary arrangement to protect itself from insolvency, but was an association incorporated by Royal Charter. Held: For the purposes of the Act, the association was to be treated as having a legal persona capable of being wound up. The words 'opening' insolvency proceedings could be read widely enough to include a creditors meeting under a proposed voluntary arrangement. Although the regulations did explicitly not apply to English companies it would be perverse to exclude the jurisdiction.
Insolvency Act 1985 8(7) - Council Regulation (EC) 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Ian Wight Michael Pilling Michael W Mackey -v- Eckhardt Marine GmbH [2003] UKPC 37; Times, 06 June 2003; [2004] 1 AC 147
14 May 2003
PC
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Nolan, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Commonwealth, Banking, Jurisdiction, Insolvency
(Cayman Islands) An international bank went into liquidation in the Cayman Islands, with liabilities in Bangladesh. A new bank was created in Bangladesh, and the applicants sought to make the new bank liable, and through them the liquidators. Held: The insolvency discharged the debts and the claimants had no case. The intention had been to isolate and preserve the Bangladeshi debts against the liquidation. The winding up order had had no effect on the respondent's debt, its situs or its proper law. It had been provable even though the lex situs and proper law were both in Bangladesh.
Lord Hoffmann said: "The winding up leaves the debts of the creditors untouched. It only effects the way in which they can be enforced. When the order is made, ordinary proceedings against the company are stayed . . The creditors are confined to a collective enforcement procedure that results in pari passu distribution of the company's assets. The winding up does not either create new substantive rights in the creditors or destroy the old ones. Their debts, if they are owing, remain debts throughout. They are discharged by the winding up only to the extent that they are paid out of dividends. But when the process of distribution is complete, there are no further assets against which they can be enforced. There is no equivalent of the discharge of a personal bankrupt which extinguishes his debt."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
GlaxoSmithKline Export Ltd -v- UK (Aid) Ltd Times, 05 June 2003; Gazette, 10 July 2003
15 May 2003
ChD
Blackburne
Costs, Insolvency
The ordinary principle that costs followed the event in contested winding up proceedings where the petition was unsuccessful was subject to exceptions. Here, the company had launched the winding up proceedings in full knowledge of the facts which would be asserted by the company in its defence. It had adopted a high risk strategy. Applying Fernforest, no exceptional circumstances existed in this case.
1 Cites


 
Glaxosmithklene Export Ltd -v- UK (Aid) Ltd [2003] EWHC 1090 (Ch)
15 May 2003
ChD
Blackburne J
Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Owo-Samson -v- Barclays Bank Plc, Boyden [2003] EWCA Civ 714; Times, 27 May 2003; Gazette, 17 July 2003
21 May 2003
CA
Ward, Carnwath LJJ, Newman J
Banking, Insolvency
The appellant challenged a formal statutory demand which had led to his bankruptcy. The demand had included the anticipated cost of realising the charged property, and also had been inflated to allow for extra costs of dealing the appellant who was perceived to be recalcitrant and unco-operative. Held: The statutory demand could only include sums due at that time to the bank, and had been included wrongly. Similarly it was inappropriate to try to include speculative costs. At later stages, such contingent liabilities might properly be allowed for (but still excluding addition costs associated with the character of the bankrupt). The court had a discretion as to whether to allow cross examination.
Insolvency Rules 1986 - Insolvency Act 1986
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Rose -v- AIB Group (UK) plc and Another Times, 08 July 2003; Gazette, 31 July 2003
9 Jun 2003
ChD
Nicholas Warren QC
Equity, Insolvency
The bank had received and paid substantial sums from the company before the petition for insolvency had been presented, and had discharged the director's charge on his house. The liquidator sought restitution under the Act. The bank replied that it had acted already in such a way as to put its own position at risk, and that the claim in restitution should be denied. Held: The court was required to try to achieve equal payment pari passsu of the debts. The bank was entitled to an order validating payments it had made prior to presentation. For payments made subsequently, the defence of restitution might be available according to the facts of the case allowing for good and bad faith. Here the alleged change of position resulted form the bank's own act, not on any assessment of the validity of the credits.
Insolvency Act 1986 127
1 Cites


 
Byford -v- Butler; In re Byford deceased [2003] EWHC 1267 (Ch); Times, 13 June 2003; Gazette, 19 June 2003; Gazette, 14 August 2003; [2004] 1 FLR 56; [2004] Fam Law 14; [2003] BPIR 1089; [2004] 2 FCR 454; [2004] 1 P & CR 12
10 Jun 2003
ChD
Mr Justice Lawrence Collins
Land, Insolvency
The house was owned in joint names. The husband became bankrupt, and the wife continued to pay the mortgage as to interest and capital. The trustee sought a declaration as to the ownership of the interests in the house. After the husband died, the trustee claimed an occupation rent. Held: The wife's interest should be calculated to allow for an occupation rent. The court should look to do justice according to the situation. The trustee had no opportuinty to occupy the property for the financial benefit of the creditors, and so fell within the class of joint owners excluded from the property. The absence of an ouster order was not conclusive against him.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Kenneth Reginald Bagnall Qc -v- the Official Receiver Times, 08 July 2003; Gazette, 04 September 2003; [2003] EWHC 1398 (Ch)
18 Jun 2003
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Evans-Lombe
Insolvency
The bankrupt was to receive his automatic discharge. The receiver had applied ex parte to suspend the automatic discharge. The bankrupt appealed. Held: The court had power to make such an order. The court had seen strong prima facie evidence that the bankrupt had failed in his obligation to co-operate with the receiver. The failure of the receiver yet to comply with the rules did not prevent the court making an order ex parte.
Insolvency Act 1986 279(3)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Shreeve -v- Taylor and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1197
9 Jul 2003
CA

Land, Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Thomas-Everard and Others -v- Society of Lloyd's Times, 28 August 2003
18 Jul 2003
ChD
Laddie J
Litigation Practice, Insolvency
The claimant appealed refusal to set aside a statutory demand made by the respondent society. The proposed defence had been already been dismissed by the courts. Held: Such a consideration was very relevant, but not necessarily determinative. The debtor was obliged to proceed quickly, and could not delay his application. He had to demonstrate a gennuine triable issue. And there was no reason why challenges at the stage of the petition should be subject to different tests of substantiality. The court of appeal had given leave to appeal. The earlier decision was not determinative, and the statutory demands could be set aside.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925) 6.5(4)(a)
1 Cites


 
Popely -v- Popely Times, 15 September 2003; Gazette, 02 October 2003
25 Jul 2003
ChD
Edward Bartley Jones QC
Insolvency
The claimant appealed refusal to set aside a statutory demand served by the defendant. The parties had become embroiled in criminal proceedings and the defendant sought recovery of assets from the claimant. In those proceedings a costs order had been made and that was the basis of the statutory demand. The claimant said that his counterclaim in the same proceedings exceeded the costs claim. Held: The judge had failed to allow that he had a discretion because the counterclaim was within the same. The insolvency court could not itself hear the counterclaim, but instead only assessed whether it appeared genuine and serious. The error was so serious as to allow the instant court to make a substitutionary order allowing the appeal.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925) 6.5(4)(a)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Johnson Control Systems Ltd -v- Techni-Track Europa Ltd (In Administrative Receivership) [2003] EWCA Civ 1126
30 Jul 2003
CA
Lady Justice Hale Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Mantell
Construction, Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Mulkerrins -v- Pricewaterhouse Coopers [2003] 4 All ER 1; [2003] All ER (D) 539; [2004] PNLR 5; [2003] UKHL 41; Gazette, 02 October 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 1937; [2003] BPIR 1357
31 Jul 2003
HL
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Millett, Lord Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Insolvency, Professional Negligence
The claimant sought damages from her former accountants for failing to protect her from bankruptcy. The receiver had unnecessarily caused great difficulties in making their claim that such an action vested in them. The defendants had subsequently, and brazenly sought to avoid laibility by denying the claimant's standing to sue them. Held: The claim by the bankrupt was of a special kind, it related to the very bankruptcy itself, and so could not vest in the trustee. Right or wrong this was in any event res judicata between these parties. As to the respondents, their right to be heard on this issue was severely limited.
Lord Millett said that a bankrupt's creditors are privies of the trustee in bankruptcy and generally bound by res judicata estoppels binding a trustee.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ House of Lords ]

 
 Official Receiver-v- Wadge Rapps & Hunt (a firm) and another and two other actions; HL 31-Jul-2003 - [2003] UKHL 49; [2003] BCC 659; [2003] 2 BCLC 257; [2003] 4 All ER 18; [2004] 1 AC 158; [2004] BPIR 139; [2003] 3 WLR 767
 
Quicksons (South and West) Limited -v- Katz, Kelmanson [2003] EWHC 1981 (Ch)
8 Aug 2003
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Evans-Lombe
Insolvency
Application had been made for the removal of the liquidators, who sought security for their costs of defending the application. They said that the company had made several substantial payments to reduce borrowings in the time shortly before the liquidation, increasing unsecured creditors and reducing the secured creditor liabilities. The claimants said the liquidation had been drawn out with unnecessarily fees incurred. Held: In the absence of any authority on the correct approach to be followed, the court felt it proper to apply a merits based approach rather than a security based approach. The application for security for costs was rejected.
Insolvency Act 1986 108(2)
[ Bailii ]
 
Maria Walcher -v- Bundesamt fur Soziales und Behindertenwesen Steiermarkt) C-201/01; [2003] EUECJ C-201/01
11 Sep 2003
ECJ

European, Employment, Insolvency
Europa Reference for a preliminary ruling: Oberster Gerichtshof - Austria. Protection of workers - Insolvency of the employer - Scope of Directive 80/987/EEC - National case-law on shareholder loans in lieu of capital contributions - Total loss of entitlement.
[ Europa ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Peter Pflucke -v- Bundesanstalt fur Arbeit C-125/01; [2003] EUECJ C-125/01
18 Sep 2003
ECJ

European, Employment, Insolvency
Europa Reference for a preliminary ruling: Sozialgericht Leipzig - Germany. Protection of workers - Insolvency of the employer - Guarantee of payment of outstanding salary - National provision laying down a two-month time-limit for lodging applications for payment and providing for an extension of that time-limit.
[ Europa ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 James Dolman & Company Ltd -v- Pedley; CA 25-Sep-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1686
 
Chu -v- Price [2003] EWCA Civ 1744
6 Oct 2003
CA

Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
MBA Investmentmanagement Ltd, Re [2003] EWHC 2277 (Ch)
8 Oct 2003
ChD
Park J
Company, Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Phillip A Roberts -v- Pinnacle Entertainment Limited [2003] EWHC 2394 (Ch)
21 Oct 2003
ChD
The Hon Mr Justice Evans-Lombe
Insolvency
This was an appeal against a revocation of an approval of an individual voluntray arrangement. The notice to creditors inviting them to attend the meeting had been in an outdated form. Held: The creditir had given suficient evidence of his debt to be allowed to vote at the meeting. The disallowance of the vote was a material irregularity, and the appeal failed.
Insolvency Act 1986 262
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Silven Properties Limited, Chart Enterprises Incorporated -v- Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, Vooght, Harris; CA 21-Oct-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1409; Times, 27 October 2003; Gazette, 20 November 2003; [2004] 1 WLR 997; [2004] 4 All ER 484
 
Oldham and others -v- Georgina Kyrris and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1506; Times, 07 November 2003; Gazette, 02 January 2004
4 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Dyson
Insolvency, Company
The claimant sought to bring a claim against the administrators of a partnership alleging a duty of care to creditors. Held: Such an administrator owed no greater duty to creditors than would a director. That duty was no different whether the duty was also a fiduciary duty or one at common law. His position was directly analagous with a director. No general duty of care was owed to creditors and the claim had properly been struck out.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Colonial Finance (UK) Limited -v- KSC Trading Limited [2003] EWCA Civ 1593
11 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Tuckey Lord Phillips Master Of The Rolls
Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
Magi Capital Partners Llp [2003] EWHC 2790 (Ch)
14 Nov 2003
ChD
Weeks QC J
Company, Insolvency
Application to stay a petition to wind up a limited liability partnership.
Limited Liability Partnership Act 2000 - Limited Liability Partnerships Regulations 2001
[ Bailii ]
 
In the Matter of Drax Holdings Limited and in the Matter of InPower Limited [2003] EWHC 2743 (Ch); [2004] 1 WLR 1049; [2004] 1 BCLC 10
17 Nov 2003
ChD
Mr Justice Lawrence Collins
Company, Insolvency
A company incorporated in Jersey comes within the Act for the purposes of the section. An English court has jurisdiction to wind up a foreign company if it has assets here or some other sufficient connection with this country.
Companies Act 1985 425
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Glencore International A G -v- Alpina Insurance Company Limitedand others [2003] EWHC 2792 (Comm)
20 Nov 2003
QBD
The Hon Mr Justice Moore-Bick
Insolvency

[ Bailii ]
 
The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry -v- Mark Goldberg James Flannagan Mcavoy [2003] EWHC 2843 (Ch); Times, 02 December 2003
26 Nov 2003
ChD
The Honourable Mr Justice Lewison
Company, Insolvency
The Secretary of State sought a disqualification order. The director argued that one shoul not be made in the absence of some breach of legal duty, some dishonesty should be shown. Held: The answer was a mixture of fact and law. A breach of duty alone was neither necessary nor sufficient. Unfitness by reason of incompetence might alone be enough. Though honesty was essential in a director, proof of dishonesty was not necessary where a breach of duty had not been shown. A standard nevertheless had to be used, even within a broad brush approach. A court must be very careful before making an order where the conduct complained of was not dishonest, and involved no breach of duty. However in this case, the standard had been met.
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 1A
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Christopher Ricketts -v- Ad Valorem Factors Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1706
28 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Simon Brown
Insolvency, Company

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Bagnall -v- Official Receiver [2003] EWCA Civ 1925
1 Dec 2003
CA

Insolvency

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Digital Equipment Co Ltd and Others -v- Bower and Others Times, 29 December 2003; Gazette, 29 January 2004; [2003] EWHC 2895 (Ch); [2004] 1 All ER 577; [2004] 1 WLR 1678
4 Dec 2003
ChD
Laddie J
Insolvency, Costs
The liquidators had lost their legal action, and had been ordered to pay the present claimants their costs. They sought payment out of an insolvency services account in competition with the solicitors for the liquidators. Held: An award of costs was not a payment of 'expenses incurred in the winding up' and therefore the court had no discretion to order payment of the costs out of the fund. London Metallurgical established the primacy of the court order and this had been preserved in the rules, but the rules did not include provision for payment of costs to be paid by the liquidators under a court order.
Insolvency Act 1986 112 156 - Insolvency Rules 1986 (SI 1986 No 1925) 4.218(1) 4.220(1)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
The Commissioners for Customs and Excise, The Arena Corporation Limited -v- The Arena Corporation Limited / Schroeder [2003] EWHC 3032 (Ch); [2004] BPIR 375
12 Dec 2003
ChD
Mr Justice Lawrence Collins
VAT, Insolvency

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Coulter -v- Chief Constable of Dorset Police Times, 24 December 2003; [2003] EWHC 3391; [2004] 1 WLR 1425
12 Dec 2003
ChD

Police, Insolvency, Equity
The claimant had failed in an action for damages against the respondent, and had failed to pay the costs award. The respondent issued a statutory demand. He claimed that it was invalid because the chief constable had changed in the interim, and there had been no assignment of the benefit of the order. Held: The office of chief constable was not a corporation, but an office. Some assignment was required. There was no statutory assignment, but there had been an equitable one. An equitable assignment need take no particular form: "All that is needed is a sufficient expression of an intention to assign". Equity would treat as done that which ought to have been done.
Insolvency Rules 1986 (1986 No 1925) 6.1
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Punch Taverns Properties Limited -v- Rowe [2003] ScotSC 62
17 Dec 2003
ScSf
Sheriff Principal I.D. Macphail, Q.C.
Scotland, Insolvency

1 Cites

[ ScotC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina (Geologistics) -v- Financial Services Compensation Scheme Times, 15 January 2004; [2003] EWCA Civ 1877
18 Dec 2003
CA
Thorpe, Waller, Latham LJJ
Insurance, Insolvency, Costs
The claimant had made a claim against an insurance company which was insolvent. The claim had been paid by the Scheme, and he now sought payment by them of the costs of the claim also. Held: The costs were payable. The construction of the sections sought by the appellant was too narrow.
Policyholder (Protection) Act 1975 6(4) 6(5)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
The Society of Lloyd's -v- Bowman and others [2003] EWCA Civ 1886
19 Dec 2003
CA

Insolvency

Insolvency Act 1986 268(1)
[ Bailii ]
 
Wade & Wade -v- Poppleton & Appleby [2003] EWHC 3159 (Ch)
19 Dec 2003
ChD
The Honourable Mr Justice David Richards
Professional Negligence, Insolvency

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