Chu v Lau [2020] UKPC 24: The Privy Council’s review of the law on just and equitable winding-up – Exchange Chambers

‘In its Judgment handed down on 12 October 2020, [[2020] UKPC 24], the Privy Council, comprised of Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Leggatt and Lord Burrows, provided a welcomed clarification of the law applicable to the just and equitable winding-up of a company; with a particular emphasis on the alternative rules which apply to those companies having the status of a quasi-partnership.’

Full Story

Exchange Chambers, 16th October 2020

Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk

COVID-19 and Corporate Insolvency – Initial Indications on the Ban on Statutory Demands and Winding Up Petitions – 3 Hare Court

Posted May 27th, 2020 in coronavirus, insolvency, news, statutory demands, winding up by sally

‘The economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic are putting incredible pressures on companies of all kinds and sizes. The UK Government has been at pains to signal its support for business during the COVID-19 pandemic, most notably the furloughing scheme and company loans announced by the Chancellor, and further announcements by the Business Secretary seeking to reduce the burden on businesses and keep companies running.’

Full Story

3 Hare Court, 11th May 2020

Source: www.3harecourt.com

Judge dismisses bid to restrain presentation by councils of winding-up petitions over unpaid business rates – Local Government Lawyer

Posted April 30th, 2020 in local government, news, rates, restraint orders, winding up by sally

‘The High Court has thrown out a case against two councils brought by the director of a company already subject to a general civil restraint order and who made a “bizarre” suggestion to a judge.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 30th April 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Commercial property landlords banned from demanding rent arrears – The Guardian

Posted April 24th, 2020 in coronavirus, debts, landlord & tenant, news, rent, repossession, winding up by sally

‘Commercial property landlords in the UK have been temporarily banned from taking legal action against tenants who have not paid their rent, to protect retailers and other businesses from “aggressive rent collection” during the coronavirus crisis.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd April 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Impact of Coronavirus on Winding Up Petitions – 3 Hare Court

‘Coronavirus has affected both the functioning of businesses and the Courts. In these unprecedented times, how are the Courts dealing with the hearings of winding up petitions?’

Full Story

3 Hare Court, 14th April 2020

Source: www.3harecourt.com

Conducting winding up petitions on Skype – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted April 17th, 2020 in chambers articles, coronavirus, courts, live link evidence, news, winding up by sally

‘While in previous weeks the winding up petition list has been adjourned for a minimum of three months, this week’s list was successfully conducted by Skype. This article discusses how the hearings worked.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd April 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Restraining Presentation or Advertisement of a Creditor’s Winding Up Petition – 33 Bedford Row

Posted February 20th, 2020 in abuse of process, chambers articles, injunctions, news, notification, winding up by sally

‘Widespread knowledge that a company is subject to a creditor’s winding up petition can cause that company serious harm. Where the creditor’s winding up petition is warranted, this harm may just be an unfortunate consequence of a valid legal process being pursued against it. However, where the creditor’s winding up petition is unwarranted, and is eventually dismissed because it is unwarranted, its dismissal will be ‘cold comfort’ to the company where, in the intervening period between presentation and dismissal, the company has suffered irreparable reputational and operational damage.’

Full Story

33 Bedford Row, 4th February 2020

Source: www.33bedfordrow.co.uk

Bury fight on after winding-up petition is dismissed in London court – The Guardian

Posted December 19th, 2019 in insolvency, news, sport, taxation, winding up by sally

‘The Companies Court heard on Wednesday that Bury and their owner, Steve Dale, had settled an outstanding debt with HM Revenue & Customs. The winding-up petition was dismissed by Judge Sally Barber, with the club instructed to pay costs.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 18th December 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com

Pending Winding Up Petition and Company entering Administration – 33 Bedford Row

Posted November 28th, 2019 in administrators, news, winding up by sally

‘Where a winding up petition is pending against a company, the company is able to enter into administration under Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (‘Schedule B1’), either through the court making an administration order in respect to the company, or through an appointment under paragraph 14 to Schedule B1 (where no provisional liquidator has been appointed and no administrative receiver is in office). When the company does enter administration, the pending winding up petition is affected.’

Full Story

33 Bedford Row, 4th November 2019

Source: www.33bedfordrow.co.uk

Insolvency Update – Using winding up procedure to collect a debt: Sell Your Car With Us Ltd v Anil Sareen [2019] EWHC 2332 – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted October 31st, 2019 in debts, insolvency, news, winding up by sally

‘The recent case of Sell Your Car With Us Ltd v Anil Sareen will be of interest to practitioners in Corporate Insolvency as it provides a useful reminder that there is no strict rule that the winding up procedure is inapt for mere debt collection.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 7th October 2019

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

The rule against reflective loss – Henderson Chambers

Posted December 12th, 2018 in company directors, news, shareholders, winding up by sally

‘Imagine a company has been dishonestly asset-stripped by one of its directors. The assets have gone into his own pocket. The company is wound up. The shareholders and creditors have little hope of recovering much from it. The obvious next step is to pursue the director. But the shareholders cannot recover the loss in value of their shareholding against him; that claim is barred by the rule against reflective loss. Is a claim by an unsecured creditor who is not a shareholder similarly barred? In Garcia v Marex Financial Limited [2018] EWCA Civ 1468, the Court of Appeal held that it was.’

Full Story

Henderson Chambers, 6th December 2018

Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk

Firm terminated retainer “without notice or good reason” – Litigation Futures

Posted October 31st, 2018 in fees, indemnities, insurance, law firms, news, notification, winding up by sally

‘A law firm’s decision to terminate its retainer without notice to the client – because it was closing down – was unreasonable and it could not claim the fees due before then, the High Court has ruled.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 31st October 2018

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Grove v S&T cited as court dismisses winding up petition (Chancery Division) – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted June 22nd, 2018 in contracts, debts, news, winding up by tracey

‘In Victory House General Partner Ltd, Re A Company [2018] EWHC 1143 (Ch), the court dismissed a party’s winding-up petition as the employer’s cross-claim was bona fide and the debt was disputed on substantial grounds.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 22nd June 2018

Source: uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com

Injury lawyers slam plans to delete company records – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted August 5th, 2016 in news, personal injuries, winding up by tracey

‘Proposals to delete millions of public records of dissolved companies could deny injured victims access to vital information, lawyers have warned.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 5th August 2016

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Just and Equitable Winding – Up & Bankruptcy Trustees – New Square Chambers

‘In a recent decision the Companies Court has held that trustees in bankruptcy do not need to satisfy the actual registration requirements set out in s.124(2)(b) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (“IA”) before presenting a just and equitable winding-up petition. For the first time, the decision in Stratford Edward Hamilton & James Ashley Dowers (Trustees in Bankruptcy of Charles Newell Brown) v Maureen Frances Brown & C&MB Holdings Ltd [2016] EWHC 191 (Ch)puts bankruptcy trustees in the same position as they are in with respect to unfair prejudice petitions and means that they do not have to wait a minimum of six months following their appointment to have the necessary locus to present a just and equitable winding up petition.’

Full story

New Square Chambers, 11th April 2016

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

Wrongful trading: A tale of Robin Hood directors – New Square Chambers

Posted December 9th, 2015 in company directors, contribution, insolvency, news, winding up by sally

‘Applications for wrongful trading under s 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986 are notoriously difficult. In Brooks v Armstrong [2015] EWHC 2289 (Ch), Registrar Jones ordered the former directors of Robin Hood Centre plc (the “Directors”) (the “Company”) to make a contribution to the Company’s assets under s 214. But the relatively small award serves as a cautionary reminder of the risks of s 214 applications for liquidators and directors alike.’

Full story

New Square Chambers, 1st December 2015

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

Resolving the rules of insolvency – 11 Stone Buildings

Posted July 28th, 2015 in appeals, consent, costs, cross-claims, insolvency, liquidators, news, winding up by sally

‘Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: In what ways has Re Kingstons Investments Ltd shed light on longstanding ambiguities in the Insolvency Rules 1986? Jamie Riley, commercial litigator at 11 Stone Buildings, explores the case and explains why the final decision will be so important for insolvency lawyers.’

Full story

11 Stone Buildings, June 2015

Source: www.11sb.com

Just like that! – New Square Chambers

Posted March 17th, 2015 in company law, duty of care, insolvency, news, winding up by sally

‘The recent decision of Mr Justice Edis in DavisonSebry v Companies House and the Registrar of Companies [2015] EWHC 115 (QB) has highlighted how, in the interconnected age of the internet, the careless click of a mouse button can have incredibly far-reaching consequences and abruptly destroy the business of a successful company. The unusual facts would suggest that further cases against the Registrar (against whom judgment was entered) would be unlikely, not least because the reporting procedures are bound to be tightened up.’

Full story (PDF)

New Square Chambers, February 2015

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

Important judgment on liquidators’ ability to obtain documents – RPC Commercial Disputes Blog

Posted March 13th, 2015 in disclosure, documents, Hong Kong, liquidators, news, winding up by sally

‘In an important judgment handed down recently by the Court of First Instance in Hong Kong, the companies judge has ruled on the ambit of the power to order a person to produce documents to a provisional liquidator pursuant to section 221(3) of the Companies (Winding-Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance.(1) For now and pending any appeal, the judgment confirms that the scope of documents “relating to the company” that have to be produced to a liquidator (pursuant to section 221(3) of the Ordinance) is narrower than the matters in respect of which a person can be examined on oath concerning the “affairs of the company” (sections 221(1) and (2)). In so doing, the judgment gives a more literal interpretation of the power to order production pursuant to section 221(3) without reference to section 221(1).’

Full story

RPC Commercial Disputes Blog,

Source: www.rpc.co.uk

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v PLT Anti-Marketing Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted February 18th, 2015 in consumer protection, law reports, unfair commercial practices, winding up by sally

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v PLT Anti-Marketing Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 76; [2015] WLR (D) 63

‘Where a court was considering whether a commercial practice amounted to a misleading omission by the omission of material information for the purposes of regulation 6 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, the court had to consider, particularly where the information omitted concerned alternative products, whether the average consumer could be said to have needed to obtain that information from the trader rather than from elsewhere.’

WLR Daily, 10th February 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk