Administrator appointment not void despite notice failure – OUT-LAW.com

Posted February 9th, 2021 in administrators, floating charges, insolvency, news, notification by tracey

‘A secured creditor’s appointment of an administrator was not void despite the fact it failed to notify its intention to make the appointment to another secured creditor whose security was in place first, the High Court has ruled.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 8th February 2021

Source: www.pinsentmasons.com

Re Skeggs Beef Limited [2019] EWHC 2607 (Ch) and SJ Henderson & Company Limited [2019] EWHC 2742 (Ch) – Case Comment – Guildhall Chambers

Posted November 19th, 2019 in electronic filing, floating charges, insolvency, news by sally

‘Two recent decisions have shed yet more light on the “byzantine” system for out of hours appointments. Both confirm that the courts will continue to take a relatively detailed, yet pragmatic, approach to this issue.’

Full Story

Guildhall Chambers, 8th November 2019

Source: www.guildhallchambers.co.uk

Court does not clear up confusion over ‘deficient’ legislation, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

“A recent High Court decision which appears to confirm that the failure to serve notice of intention to appoint an administrator on the relevant company does not invalidate the appointment leaves unanswered questions, a restructuring law expert has said.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 6th August 2012

Source: www.out-law.com

In re Airbase (UK) Ltd; In re Airbase International Services Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted February 7th, 2008 in floating charges, insolvency, law reports by sally

In re Airbase (UK) Ltd; In re Airbase International Services Ltd [2008] EWHC 124 (Ch); [2008] WLR (D) 30

“The provisions of s 176A of the Insolvency Act 1986, which dealt with floating charges relating to property of a company that was, inter alia, in administration, excluded from participation in any distribution from the ‘prescribed part’ of a company’s net property, as defined in s 176A(6) of the Act, secured creditors who had unsecured debts due to a shortfall in the value of their security.”

WLR Daily, 6th February 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.