High Court allows more time for steelworker claims – Litigation Futures

‘The High Court has given the personal representatives of deceased steelworkers more time to register their compensation claims under a group litigation order (GLO).’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 7th February 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Liquidators can use, but not enforce, adjudication in construction contracts – OUT-LAW.com

‘Companies in liquidation can theoretically refer claims to an adjudicator under construction law but it would be a futile exercise as the decision could not be enforced in most cases, the Court of Appeal in England has ruled.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 4th February 2019

Source: www.out-law.com

Does Cannon v Primus mean an end to general jurisdictional reservations? – Practical Law: Construction Blog

‘It was only published at the end of last week, so I’m not sure if you’ve had chance to look at Coulson LJ’s judgment in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd, Cannon Corporate Ltd v Primus Build Ltd. If not, then you should. It contains some important stuff about liquidation and CVAs, and when it is appropriate (and possible) to adjudicate if the referring party is subject to one of those processes.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 30th January 2019

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

High Court: administrator appointment can be simultaneous with court notice – OUT-LAW.com

Posted November 12th, 2018 in administrators, insolvency, news, notification, time limits by tracey

‘The High Court in England has confirmed that the industry standard wording used in the notice of appointment does not invalidate the appointment of the administrators. The same practice had previously been called into question in a case involving NJM Clothing.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 12th November 2018

Source: www.out-law.com

Treat Insolvency Rules as ‘a complete code’ for payment of statutory interest, rules Court of Appeal – OUT-LAW.com

‘The Court of Appeal has determined the extent of creditors’ entitlements to statutory interest on their debts and the correct approach for calculating their entitlement. It has ruled on the entitlement of representative creditors of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (LBIE) to the surplus funds and on the calculation of the statutory interest due to them.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 10th November 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Aspects of burial law from Brady’s funeral judgment – Law & Religion UK

‘On 13 October, the High Court handed down the judgment Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council & Ors v Robin Makin & Ors [2017] EWHC Case No: HC-2017-002064 (Ch) concerning the arrangements for the disposal of the body of Ian Stewart-Brady, formerly Ian Brady (the “deceased”), one of the infamous Moors murderers. We posted some initial comments based upon the Court’s judgment and the Summary which it produced “to assist in understanding the Court’s decision”.’

Full Story

Law & Religion UK, 8th November 2017

Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com

Solicitor who took client data to new firm without consent rebuked and fined – Legal Futures

‘A London solicitor who took confidential information from defunct London firm Davenport Lyons (DL) to his new employer without client consent has been rebuked and fined £2,000 by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 26th June 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

In re Nortel Networks UK Ltd and related companies (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted June 21st, 2017 in administrators, courts, expenses, insolvency, jurisdiction, law reports by sally

In re Nortel Networks UK Ltd and related companies (No 2) [2017] EWHC 1429 (Ch)

‘The applicants, the administrators of companies in the same group, were aware of a number of potential claims, which might if established, qualify as administration expenses (“expense claims”), and thereby rank for payment in priority to the claims of unsecured creditors. Neither the Insolvency Act 1986, nor the Insolvency Rules 1986, nor the Insolvency Rules 2016 provided any express mechanism under which an administrator could require expense claims to be asserted by a specific date, or enable him to refuse to deal with claims asserted after that date in the context of a distribution to unsecured creditors. In the absence of any applicable statutory scheme, the administrators applied to the High Court for directions under paragraph 63 of Schedule B1 to the 1986 Act to implement a scheme informing potential claimants that any expense claims which had not yet been made had to be notified to the administrators on a prescribed form on or before a specified date.’

WLR Daily, 16th June 2017

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In re Nortel Networks UK Ltd and related companies – WLR Daily

Posted November 8th, 2016 in administrators, agreements, insolvency, law reports by sally

In re Nortel Networks UK Ltd and related companies [2016] EWHC 2769 (Ch)

‘The administrators of nineteen Europe, Middle East and Africa companies in the N group and the conflict administrator of one of those companies applied for directions enabling a global settlement to be made of the vast majority of disputes that had arisen in relation to the affairs of the group and the distribution of the proceeds of sale of its assets.’

WLR Daily, 31st November 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Woman who used conveyancers to litigate probate dispute told to repay money lost to estate – Legal Futures

Posted August 26th, 2016 in administrators, fees, news, probate, repayment by sally

‘A woman who obtained a grant of letters of administration and then used a firm of licensed conveyancers to defend herself against a claim from other potential beneficiaries, has been told by the High Court that she has to pay back to the estate nearly £87,000 given to the firm that has been lost.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 26th August 2016

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Law firm investigating VW emissions scandal hired to examine BHS – The Guardian

Posted August 12th, 2016 in administrators, bankruptcy, insolvency, law firms, news, pensions by sally

‘The US law firm investigating the diesel emissions scandal at Volkswagen is to examine the conduct of BHS directors in the run-up to the retailer’s collapse.’

Full story

The Guardian, 11th August 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Hosking and another v Slaughter and May – WLR Daily

Posted June 3rd, 2016 in administrators, costs, insolvency, law reports by sally

Hosking and another v Slaughter and May [2016] EWCA Civ 474

‘During a company’s administration the administrators employed a firm of solicitors and agreed their fees. The company was wound up and the liquidators were subsequently appointed. Shortly thereafter the administrators approved the solicitors’ final invoice which post-dated the liquidators’ appointment. The liquidators applied to the court for an order for a detailed assessment of the costs agreed between the administrators and the solicitors, pursuant to rule 7.34 of the Insolvency Rules 1986. The registrar concluded that the administrators could agree and pay the fees of the solicitors and there was neither power under rule 7.34 nor inherent jurisdiction for the court to order a detailed assessment of costs. The judge dismissed the liquidators’ appeal against the registrar’s order refusing a detailed assessment of costs but allowed the appeal in respect of the final invoice, concluding that rule 7.34 did not apply to former administrators so the final invoice had not been properly approved and would have to be approved by the liquidators. The liquidators appealed against the judge’s decision not to order a detailed assessment and the solicitors appealed against the order that the final invoice had not been properly approved.’

WLR Daily, 24th May 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Appeal judges refuse to order assessment of costs agreed by administrators – Litigation Futures

Posted May 26th, 2016 in administrators, appeals, costs, fees, insolvency, law firms, news by tracey

‘The Court of Appeal has refused a request by the liquidators of a company for a detailed assessment of costs agreed by the firm’s administrators.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 25th May 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

In re Hartmann Capital Ltd (in special administration) – WLR Daily

Posted June 9th, 2015 in administrators, fees, insolvency, law reports by tracey

In re Hartmann Capital Ltd (in special administration); [2015] EWHC 1514 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 241

‘As a matter of construction of article 4 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Commencement No 5 and Saving Provisions) Order 2013, which spoke in specific terms of an administrator “appointed pursuant to the provisions of Part II of the [Insolvency] 1986 Act” and a company which had “entered into administration under Part II of the 1986 Act”, administrators appointed pursuant to the Investment Bank Special Administration Regulations 2011 (SI 2011/245) were denied the funding possibilities available to other administrators.’

WLR Daily, 13th May 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Administration of rights associated with digital information as part of the deceased’s estate – New Square Chambers

Posted April 29th, 2015 in administrators, internet, news by sally

‘Under English law, information does not pass as property to a personal representative after the death of the deceased, (See Oxford v Moss [1979] 68 Cr App R 183; per Lord Upjohn in Boardman v Phipps [1967] 2 AC 46, at 127; and per Floyd LJ in Your Response Limited v Datateam Business Media Ltd [2015] QB 41, at paragraph [42]) but rights associated with the information can vest in the representative. Where the information is digital, it exists as electrical signals rather than as an integral part of a physical form such as the words printed on the paper of a book. Digital information can exist both locally, on computing devices that were owned and used by the deceased, and in a cloud, on computing devices that are connected to the internet and to which the deceased had been connected for the provision of digital and other services. It is no longer sufficient to deliver a computing device to the relevant beneficiary without investigating what digital information is stored on that device and whether the deceased stored any digital information in a cloud. In some cases, information stored on a local device can provide the only clue to the existence of cloudstored information.’

Full story (PDF)

New Square Chambers, March 2015

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

In re Melodious Corpn; Pui-Kwan v Kam-Ho and others – WLR Daily

Posted April 8th, 2015 in administrators, company directors, insolvency, law reports by sally

In re Melodious Corpn; Pui-Kwan v Kam-Ho and others [2015] EWHC 621 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 162

‘Rule 7.55 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 had no application in circumstances where a meeting of the board of directors of the company purporting to place the company into administration out of court pursuant to paragraph 22(2) of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 was inquorate and accordingly the resolution to appoint an administrator was invalid.’

WLR Daily, 10th March 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

In re PGL Realisations plc and other companies; Laverty and others v British Gas Trading Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted August 6th, 2014 in administrators, debts, energy, insolvency, law reports by sally

In re PGL Realisations plc and other companies; Laverty and others v British Gas Trading Ltd [2014] EWHC 2721 (Ch); [2014] WLR (D) 364

‘Charges arising under deemed contracts for supplies of gas and electricity to retail premises after the companies had entered into administration and after the premises had been vacated by the companies were provable debts within rule 13(12(1)(b) of the Insolvency Rules 1986.’

WLR Daily, 31st July 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Fruit machines and Blue Monkeys: can administrators be personally liable for converting ROT goods? – 11 Stone Buildings

Posted June 26th, 2014 in administrators, gambling, insolvency, news, title to goods by sally

‘Administrators are often faced with a large number of retention of title (“ROT”) claims from suppliers who demand a quick adjudication of their claim, frequently on the back of incomplete evidence, and in the days immediately following an appointment when administrators’ resources are stretched. The recent decision Blue Monkey Gaming Ltd v Hudson & others [2014] EWHC (Ch)provides some useful guidance for both administrators and ROT claimants.’

Full story (PDF)

11 Stone Buildings, June 2014

Source: www.11sb.com

Buying businesses and assets from an administrator ~ Guidelines for the unwary – 11 Stone Buildings

Posted May 12th, 2014 in administrators, employment, insolvency, news, sale of goods by sally

‘Purchasing businesses and assets from an administrator can be tempting at an attractive price but there are lots of traps for the unwary. In this Insider, Tom Shepherd focuses on three key areas to consider when there is a sale of a business out of administration. First, he lists the types of sale that an administrator is likely to be involved in, including the much talked about pre-pack. Then he outlines the different types of due diligence a purchaser might want to think about when he is buying assets from an administrator. Last but not least, he considers the position of employees in that situation.’

Full story (PDF)

11 Stone Buildings, May 2014

Source: www.11sb.com

“Game, set but not quite match” following the C of A decision re rents in administration – 11 Stone Buildings

Posted March 10th, 2014 in administrators, expenses, insolvency, leases, news, rent by sally

‘Many commercial landlords will be delighted with the Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision in Jervis v Pillar Denton Limited (Game Station) and Others [2014] EWCA Civ 180, overruling the decisions in Goldacre and Luminar. The Court of Appeal held that, applying the Lundy Granite principle, the question of whether quarterly rent due under a lease was an administration expense or a provable debt depended not on whether the rent fell due during the period of the administration, but whether the property had been used for the benefit of the administration. Sarah Clarke gives the background to these cases, sets out the Game appeal decision and highlights its consequences as well as the real concerns for officeholders.’

Full story

11 Stone Buildings, February 2014

Source: www.11sb.com