“Making it easier and less expensive to claim compensation from insolvent defendants is the aim of a new Bill put before Parliament today.”
Ministry of Justice, 23rd November 2009
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
“The anti-deprivation rule, which as a matter of public policy prevented parties from contracting out of the insolvency legislation by removing assets otherwise available for creditors, did not apply to complex contractual provisions by which investors were granted rights over assets derived from their own moneys, rights which were modified when an event of default happened, or to licence termination and share option provisions operative on insolvency which did not contravene the Insolvency Act 1986. The rule did not normally apply to a deprivation completed before the liquidation, bankruptcy or its equivalent occurred.”
WLR Daily, 10th November 2009
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.
4 Eng Ltd v Harper and others (No 2) [2009] EWHC 2633 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 307
“Where it was established that the transferor had entered into a transaction at an undervalue for the purpose of defrauding creditors, the nature of any order and the extent of the relief granted by the court under ss 423(2) and 425 of the Insolvency Act 1986 should take into account the mental state of the transferee of property under a relevant transaction, or of any other person against whom an order was sought, and the degree of their involvement in the fraudulent scheme of the debtor/transferor to put assets out of the reach of his creditors.”
WLR Daily, 26th October 2009
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.
“Although a contractual provision which had the effect of requiring a person who had become insolvent to be deprived of an asset conflicted with the principle that an insolvent’s assets would be available for distribution among his creditors and would generally be unenforceable, the principle did not invalidate contractual provisions which had the effect of prejudicing creditors of a company in the event of insolvency by the actual or effective removal of an asset from the insolvent estate.”
WLR Daily, 30th July 2009
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.
Syska and another v Vivendi Universal SA and others [2009] EWCA Civ 677; [2009] WLR (D) 236
“Where a party to an arbitration reference became insolvent in an EU member state while the arbitration proceedings were pending in another member state, the appropriate law applicable to determine the validity of the agreement to progress the arbitration was the law of the member state where the arbitration was pending.”
WLR Daily, 10th July 2009
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.
Bloom and Others v Harms Offshore AHT “Taurus” and “Magnus” GmbH and Co KG
Court of Appeal
“Where creditors of a company in administration had attached property owned by that company in a foreign jurisdiction, the courts had power, in some circumstances, to grant injunctive relief affecting procedures in that foreign jurisdiction.”
The Times, 10th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“The ‘centre of main interests’ for the purposes of the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 must be identified by reference to factors which were both objective and ascertainable by third parties. What was ascertainable by a third party was what was in the public domain and what a typical third party would learn as a result of dealing with the company.”
WLR Daily, 6th July 2009
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.
Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Holland and another [2009] EWCA Civ 625; [2009] WLR (D) 228
“A human director of a corporate director could in certain circumstances be regarded as a de facto director of the subject company but he would not automatically be so regarded.”
WLR Daily, 3rd July 2009
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.
“Where creditors had, in a foreign jurisdiction, attached certain property owned by a company in administration, the comity owed by the courts of different jurisdictions to each other would normally make it inappropriate for the municipal courts to grant injunctive relief affecting procedures in a court of foreign jurisdiction. However, due regard to certain relevant factors, such as the conduct of the creditors against whom the injunction was sought and the circumstances of the attachment, might justify the grant of an injunction.”
WLR Daily, 29th June 2009
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.
In re Dairy Farmers of Britain Ltd [2009] EWHC 1389 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 201
“Parliament intended that Parts I and II of the Insolvency Act 1986 should not apply to an industrial and provident society (‘IPS’), and there was no reason for adopting a different approach to Part III of the Act, either generally or with specific reference to s 72A of the Act. Further, section 37 in Part III of the Act could have no specific application to receivers of an IPS.”
WLR Daily, 19th June 2009
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.
Gresham International Ltd and others v Moonie and others [2009] EWHC 1093 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 168
“The court had power, under its supervisory role of compulsory winding up and bankruptcy, to make orders that would effectively grant retrospective sanction to a liquidator who had issued proceedings in her name without first obtaining the sanction of the liquidation committee or the Secretary of State, as required under section 167 of the Insolvency Act 1986, notwithstanding that the criteria in r 4.184 (ii) of the Insolvency Rules as to the retrospective ratification of a liquidator’s acts had not been met.”
WLR Daily, 21st May 2009
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.
Bolsover District Council v Dennis Rye Ltd
Court of Appeal
“A judge hearing a winding-up petition against a company, when faced with a cross-claim by the company against the petitioner, had to consider only whether the evidence before him was sufficient to satisfy him that the company’s cross-claim was not merely arguable but was genuine and serious, and not whether the company should have previously taken action on the cross-claim unless it had a good reason for not doing so.”
The Times, 19th May 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Bolsover District council v Dennis Rye Ltd; [2009] EWCA Civ 372; [2009] WLR (D) 147
“Where a company served with a winding-up petition contended that it had a cross-claim against the petitioner, the issue for the judge was whether the evidence before him was sufficient to satisfy him that the company’s cross claim was not merely arguable but was genuine and serious, and not whether the company should have previously asserted, litigated or issued proceedings for the cross-claim unless it had a good excuse for not doing so.”
WLR Daily, 7th May 2009
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.
“The number of directors of insolvent companies disqualified for financial crime is soaring as the recession takes hold, according to government figures.”
The Times, 4th May 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform v Neufeld and Another
Court of Appeal
“A person who was a majority shareholder and director of a company could also be an employee of that company under a contract of employment, even if he had total control of the company.”
The Times, 10th April 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“Although the interests and liabilities of a member of a limited liability partnership were different from those of a contributory to a limited company and those differences might lead to some changes in practice so far as petitions to wind them up were concerned, a person seeking to exercise a right to appear and be heard in court proceedings, whether as creditor or contributory, should at least claim to be a member of the class on whom that right was conferred.”
WLR Daily, 17th February 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Chancery Division
“Documents created by one party and sent to another did not necessarily cease to be correspondence, to which the privacy provisions of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights could apply, when they were received by the latter.”
The Times, 6th November 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Warner v Verfides (Hafner and another intervening) [2008] EWHC 2609 (Ch); [2008] WLR (D) 338
“There was no reason why documents created by one party and sent to another should cease to be “correspondence” on their receipt by the latter. In the case of business correspondence, it could still engage the right to respect for private life under art 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”
WLR Daily, 31st October 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.
In re Courts plc [2008] EWHC 2339 (Ch); [2008] WLR (D) 311
“S 176A(2) of the Insolvency Act 1986, which provided that a prescribed part of a company’s net property should be available for the satisfaction of unsecured debts, applied either in its entirety or not at all. There was no jurisdiction under s 176A(5) to order a partial disapplication of s 176A(2) regarding unsecured creditors with claims of a certain value.”
WLR Daily, 10th October 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.
Court of Appeal
“Protective awards made by an employment tribunal following the failure of a company to comply with its statutory obligation to consult concerning collective redundancies before going into liquidation were contingent debts of the company and therefore provable debts in the liquidation.”
The Times, 22nd July 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
© Inner Temple Library 2024