Morritt LJ, giving the judgment of the court, distinguished between the conduct of two directors, disqualifying one for twelve years and the other for eight. He said: ‘The period for disqualification is a matter for the discretion of the judge hearing the application to be exercised in accordance with the relevant principles. One such principle is the recognition of the categories of case indicated by this court in Re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd ‘
 BCC 224
England and Wales
Cited – In re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd CA 1990
The court gave guidelines for the periods of disqualification to be applied for company directors under the Act. The maximum period of ten years should be reserved for only the most serious of cases. Periods of two to five years should apply to . .
See Also – Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v McTighe (No 2) CA 1996
The court accepted that it was misconduct for a director to pursue: ‘the policy of not paying the debts of creditors who are not pressing when it is known that the company has insufficient reserves enabling it to trade except at the risk of such . .
Cited – Cathie and Another v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills CA 1-Jun-2012
The directors appealed against disqualification orders made against them under the 1986 Act. Their company had become insolvent, owing substantial arrears of PAYE and NI contributions. The revenue had said that they had paid other creditors first. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.465968