Successful adjudication enforcement in favour of an insolvent company – Practical Law: Construction Blogger

‘Hot on the heels of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd, in what may be the first summary judgment to enforce an adjudicator’s decision in favour of a party in administration, we have successfully represented the claimant in Styles and Wood Ltd (in administration) (S&W) v GE CIF Trustees Ltd.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 1st October 2020

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

Re Debenhams Retail: do the wages of furloughed employees enjoy super priority in an insolvency? – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The Appellants were the Joint Administrators of Debenhams Retail Ltd (“the Company”), which had entered into administration on 9 April 2020. This had followed decisions in late March to place some 14,000 of its employees on furlough under the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (“the Scheme”).’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 11th August 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Dealing with estate administration – Family Law

‘It is the job of Executors (appointed under a Will) or Administrators (entitled by law where there is no Will) to deal with administering the estate of someone who has died.’

Full Story

Family Law, 22nd May 2020

Source: www.familylaw.co.uk

The Court of Appeal provides confirmation on the implications of the use of the Government’s coronavirus job retention scheme by companies in administration: Re Debenhams Retail Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 600 – Radcliffe Chambers

‘In a judgment handed down on 6th May 2020 in Re Debenhams Retail Ltd (in administration) [2020] EWCA Civ 600, the Court of Appeal provided confirmation on the implications for office holders and insolvent estates of using the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme in administrations, following the previous first instance decisions on the issue in Re Carluccio’s Ltd [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch) and Re Debenhams Retail Ltd [2020] EWHC 921 (Ch). Matthew Weaver considers the judgment and its implications in this briefing.’

Full Story

Radcliffe Chambers, 13th May 2020

Source: radcliffechambers.com

Insolvency Administrations Under the Coronavirus Lockdown – Thomas More Chambers

‘Insolvency administrators often like to compare their salvage missions to the activity of fungi in recycling dying matter. Administrators, like fungi, earn a living by grappling with the products of decay, taking apart dying businesses and, where possible, identifying, reconstituting and revivifying the most promising bits.’

Full Story

Thomas More Chambers, 20th April 2020

Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk

Sign of the times: Debenhams Retail Ltd (in administration): Administrators and furlough arrangements – Exchange Chambers

‘It is a sign of the times that there have been two urgent applications to the High Court of Justice for directions by administrators in respect of furlough arrangements in the course of one week. Each application has concerned high profile companies employing vast numbers of people. The financial implications of the issues before the court in each case are significant for both employees and administrators.’

Full Story

Exchange Chambers, 22nd April 2020

Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk

The consequences for administrators of furloughing employees – further clarification: Re Debenhams Retail Limited [2020] EWHC 921 (Ch) – Radcliffe Chambers

‘In a judgment dated 17th April 2020 in Re Debenhams Retail Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 921 (Ch), Trower J determined an application for directions by the joint administrators of Debenhams which concerned the impact of the application of the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme in administrations and the recent decision of Snowden J in Re Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch). Matthew Weaver considers Trower J’s judgment and its implications in this briefing.’

Full Story

Radcliffe Chambers, 21st April 2020

Source: radcliffechambers.com

Re Carluccio’s Limited (in Administration) – Pump Court Chambers

‘It should be noted from the outset that Snowden J’s judgment in Re Carluccio’s is not binding. There were no representative employees or interested parties during the remote video hearing so the judgment does not bind the employees or the government.’

Full Story

Pump Court Chambers, 22nd April 2020

Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com

‘Light Touch’ Administration as a Rescue Tool – 3 Hare Court

‘On the 28 March 2020, the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy announced a series of insolvency legislation reforms including a new court based restructing tool modelled on the Scheme of Arrangement and a short business moratorium to protect companies facing the prospect of insolvency as a result of the Covid-19 crisis.’

Full Story

3 Hare Court, 20th April 2020

Source: www.3harecourt.com

Use of the Government’s coronavirus job retention scheme by companies in administration: Re Carluccio’s Limited [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch) – Radcliffe Chambers

‘In a judgment handed down on Monday 13th April 2020 in Re Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch), Snowden J considered the application of the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme in administrations both as a matter of principle and in respect of the logistics and practicalities involved for office holders. Matthew Weaver considers the judgment and its implications in this briefing.’

Full Story

Radcliffe Chambers, 16th April 2020

Source: radcliffechambers.com

Carluccio’s, Covid-19 and Catch 22: The Furlough Scheme and paragraph 99(5) of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The judgment Re Carluccio’s Ltd [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch) provides some much-needed clarity on the interrelation of the Furlough Scheme and the requirements of insolvency legislation. It is to be commended for its clarity and for the fact that it had to construe the workings of the Furlough Scheme in the absence of any statutory guidance as to its implementation. It is to be hoped that, when the Government comes to enact the necessary legislative measures (including perhaps amendments to Schedule B1 and IR 2016), that it does so with this judgment very firmly in mind.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 14th April 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch). The first judicial decision on the Government’s Furlough Scheme – Parklane Plowden

‘In a judgment handed down by Snowden J on a bank holiday on 13 April 2020 in the matter of Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch), we have the first decision regarding the application of the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (“the Scheme”). The Scheme allows employers to claim for 80% of an employee’s salary (up to a maximum of £2500 per month) if staff are kept on the books doing no work (furloughed) rather than dismissed as redundant.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden, 16th April 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

James Wilson discusses the Temporary Insolvency Practice Direction 2020 (“TIPD”) – Park Square Barristers

‘On 6th April 2020 the TIPD came into force. It implements a number of changes and supplements to the Practice Direction – Insolvency Proceedings July 2018. The purpose is to avoid, where possible, parties attending court in person and the likely disruption in proceedings as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.’

Full Story

Park Square Barristers, 8th April 2020

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

A guide to the future ahead for TUPE and insolvency – Littleton Chambers

‘On Easter Monday, 13 April 2020, the High Court (Snowden J presiding) handed down its judgment in the matter of Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch). To add to the Easter joy, the furlough guidance was amended on 9 April 2020 and the judgment had to embrace the amended guidance. One of the clarifying amendments on 9 April was the confirmation that employees who transfer under TUPE after 28 February 2020 may be placed, or continue, on furlough. This has practical implications in the light of this judgment.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 14th April 2020

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Carluccio’s Limited (in administration): Administration and furlough arrangements with employees – Exchange Chambers

‘Snowden J gives urgently sought directions to administrators in respect of furlough arrangements with employees following a remote video hearing in the matter of Carluccio’s Limited (in administration) [2020] EWHC 886 (Ch).’

Full Story

Exchange Chambers, 15th April 2020

Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk

High Court rejects attempt to adjourn £250m trial because of virus – Litigation Futures

‘The High Court has rejected an application to adjourn a five-week trial of a £250m insolvency claim because of the coronavirus pandemic.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 9th April 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Directors disqualified after abandoning care homes, diverting council funds – Local Government Lawyer

‘The directors of two care homes in the Midlands have been disqualified after they diverted council funds before abandoning elderly residents and staff, the Insolvency Services has revealed.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 31st March 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Further Lessons from Lehman Bros: The Court’s Control of Office Holders – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted March 20th, 2020 in administrators, appeals, banking, chambers articles, coronavirus, debts, insolvency, news by sally

‘When major financial institutions go to the wall the ensuing legal squabbles over the carcases often provide rich seams that can be mined to provide judicial clarification of the law for the benefit of all. The spectacular collapse of the Lehman Brothers empire is no exception and the latest chapter does not disappoint. In Lehman Brothers Australia Ltd (In Liquidation) v Macnamara & Ors (Joint Administrators of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (In Administration)) [2020] EWCA Civ 321, the Court of Appeal (Patten, David Richards, Newey LJJ) has provided some timely and useful clarification on the correct test for the court to apply when considering the exercise of its inherent jurisdiction to control its officers within the principle of Re Cordon, Ex p. James (1873-74) LR 9 Ch App 609 or through the more specifically targeted statutory provisions for such control, as for example those in para 74 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) with regard to administrators. In the present climate induced by Coronavirus (COVID-19), any clarity that makes the necessity of going to court less likely is to be doubly welcomed.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 17th March 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Case highlights need for certainty in out of hours administration appointments – OUT-LAW.com

‘The High Court ruled that it is not permissible for a notice of appointment of administrators by the directors of a company to be e-filed out of court hours. The court ruled that the defect was curable and that the appointment took effect at the time the court opened for business the next working day. This judgment adds to the growing number of conflicting cases about the validity and time of the appointment when notices are e-filed out of hours.

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 6th March 2020

Source: www.pinsentmasons.com

Developments since Keyworker Homes – Exchange Chambers

Posted February 26th, 2020 in administrators, chambers articles, electronic filing, insolvency, news by sally

‘In a judgment which disagreed with the recently reported decisions of Re Skeggs Beef Limited[2019] EWHC 2607 (Ch) and Re SJ Henderson and Co Ltd [2019] EWHC 2742 (Ch), HHJ Hodge QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court found:

1) Notices of Intention to Appoint Administrators (“NOI”) can be filed at any time via e-filing and take effect at the time they are filed via e-filing.
2) Directors or the Company can make out of hours appointments of Administrators by filing a Notice of Appointment (“NOA”) at any time via e-filing. The appointment will take effect at the time the documents are filed via e-filing.
3) That for the purposes of the computation of the period of 10 business days pursuant to para 28(2) of Sch.B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986, the first business day will be the business day after the date on which the NOI was filed – thus it is a ‘clear days’ calculation.’

Full Story

Exchange Chambers, 20th February 2020

Source: www.exchangechambers.co.uk