‘It is now more than 17 years since the Enterprise Act 2002 was enacted with the laudable aim of streamlining the administration procedure, resulting in the introduction of the out-of-court administration regime set out in Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (“the Act”).’
Guildhall Chambers, 2nd December 2019
Source: www.guildhallchambers.co.uk
‘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.’
33 Bedford Row, 4th November 2019
Source: www.33bedfordrow.co.uk
‘Insolvency and Companies Court (ICC) Judge Barber held that the Lundy Granite principle does not extend to an obligation to ‘top up’ a rent deposit fund, where sums had been withdrawn from the fund to pay rent. Re London Bridge Entertainment Partners shows how seemingly immaterial business decisions made when an entity is solvent will be thrown into relief when the same entity becomes insolvent. Here, the decision to ‘pay first, ask questions later’ from the deposit fund meant that the landlord effectively lost its priority ranking in respect of those rent payments; a priority it could otherwise have been entitled to. The case also demonstrates that the ambit of provable debts will continue to be construed broadly, while the category of administration expenses will be narrowly construed. Written by Samuel Parsons, barrister at Guildhall Chambers.’
Guildhall Chambers, 22nd November 2019
Source: www.guildhallchambers.co.uk
‘Phillip Patterson provides a summary of recent corporate insolvency cases covering:
– Fraudulent trading;
– Misfeasance, transactions defrauding creditors and the duties of directors; and
– The out of court appointment of administrators.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 9th October 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Customers who were mis-sold loans by the collapsed payday lender Wonga are expected to receive less than 10% of what they are owed in compensation after administrators revealed that only £41m will be put aside for claimants.’
The Guardian, 9th October 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The High Court has given the personal representatives of deceased steelworkers more time to register their compensation claims under a group litigation order (GLO).’
Litigation Futures, 7th February 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.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.’
OUT-LAW.com, 4th February 2019
Source: www.out-law.com
‘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.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 30th January 2019
‘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.’
OUT-LAW.com, 12th November 2018
Source: www.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.’
OUT-LAW.com, 10th November 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘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”.’
Law & Religion UK, 8th November 2017
Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com
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 [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
‘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.’
Legal Futures, 26th August 2016
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘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.’
The Guardian, 11th August 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
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
‘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.’
Litigation Futures, 25th May 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
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
‘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
© Inner Temple Library 2025