Our website is set to allow the use of cookies. For more information and to change settings click here. If you are happy with cookies please click "Continue" or simply continue browsing. Continue.

Company Law

Analysis - guidance - compliance

11 JUL 2013

July 2013

To see this information in full, subscribe to Gore-Browne Online,  request a FREE trial to this service or any other Gore-Browne on EU, International Corporate Procedures, Jordans Company Administration and Governance,

HAMID (T/A HAMID PROPERTIES) v FRANCIS BRADSHAW PARTNERSHIP [2013] EWCA Civ 470

Court of Appeal, Rix, Mccombe and McCombe LJJ

2 May 2013

Mr Jeremy Nicholson QC and Ms Kate Livesey for the appellant/defendant
Mr Adrian Williamson QC and Mr Gideon Scott Holland for the respondent/claimant

Cur adv vult

JACKSON LJ:

[1]        This judgment is in six parts, namely ...

IRISH BANK RESOLUTION CORPORATION LTD v DTZ DEBENHAM TIE LEUNG LTD [2013] EWHC 596 (Comm)

Queens Bench Division

Burton J

7 March 2013

Mr. R. Davies QC and Mr. L. Wygas for the applicant/defendant.
Mr. C. Freedman QC and Mr. R. Hanke for the respondent/claimant.

Cur adv vult

BURTON J:

[1]        This has been an application for security for costs by the Defendant, DTZ Debenham Tie Leung Ltd, in a claim brought against them by Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd, which is due to come for trial in June. There are obviously substantial costs already incurred, although the slightly unusual feature of the case is that the Defendant is not intending to call, or rely upon, any factual witnesses in relation to the claim brought against it for professional negligence in the valuation of a development site in Lincolnshire, but is intending to rely only on an expert witness report to be served. The Claimant has already prepared its factual and expert witnesses. The Claimant asserts that that indicates that it has very strong merits in the claim, but I, clearly, am unable to resolve that question, and the parties, in the end, did not address me on merits or suggest what would in any even be relatively exceptional, namely that the merits, should impinge upon my conclusion with regard to security.


BNY CORPORATE TRUSTEE SERVICES LIMITED AND OTHERS v NEUBERGER BERMAN EUROPE LTD (ON BEHALF OF SEALINK FUNDING LTD) AND OTHERS BNY CORPORATE TRUSTEE SERVICES LIMITED AND OTHERS v EUROSAIL-UK 2007-3BL PLC [2013] UKSC 28

 

Supreme Court

Lord Hope of Craighead, Deputy, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Lord Mance
Lord Sumption
Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill

9 May 2013

Gabriel Moss QC and Richard Fisher for appellant/Cross-Respondents
Robin Dicker QC and Jeremy Goldring 2nd respondent/Cross-appellant
David Allison 1st respondent

Cur adv vult

LORD WALKER

(with whom Lord Mance, Lord Sumption and Lord Carnwath agree)

[1]        Sections (1) and (2) of section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986 ("the 1986 Act") provide as follows ...

COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY'S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS v MARKS AND SPENCER PLC
[2013] UKSC 30

Supreme Court

Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, President, Lord Hope of Craighead, Deputy President, Deputy, Lord Mance, Lord Reed Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill

22 May 2013

David Milne QC and Nicola Shaw QC for M&S PLC
David Ewart QC and Sarah Ford for HMRC

Cur adv vult

LORD HOPE OF CRAIGHEAD:

(with whom Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Reed and Lord Carnwath agree)

[1]        This litigation concerns claims by Marks and Spencer plc ("M&S") for group relief in respect of losses sustained by two of their subsidiaries: Marks and Spencer (Deutschland) GmbH ("MSD"), which was resident in Germany; and Marks and Spencer (Belgium) NV ("MSB"), which was resident in Belgium. The claims were originally made and refused by the Revenue ("HMRC") more than ten years ago. They raise questions about the availability of cross-border group relief and the method of quantifying such relief as is available which, despite having been the subject of nine separate hearings since the case was first considered in December 2002, have still not yet been resolved.

 

RC BREWERY LIMITED v THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESY'S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS
[2013] EWHC 1184 (Ch)

Chancery Division

Warren J

10 May 2013

Andrew Butler for the applicant
Edward Waldegrave the General Counsel and for the Respondents

Cur adv vult

WARREN J

[1]        This is an application by RC Brewery Ltd (“the Company”) for a validation order (of limited scope) under section 127 Companies Act 1985.  It is made in the context of a winding-up petition (“the Petition”) presented on 11 April 2013 and served on 16 April 2013.  The petitioning creditor (“HMRC”) is the respondent to an application to restrain advertisement of the Petition to which I come in a moment.  The petition debt relates to unpaid beer duty and penalties in a sum  well in excess of £2m although the actual amount outstanding has been reduced to £1.485m since presentation of the Petition.

 

Jordan Publishing Company Administration and Governance

Jordan Publishing Company Administration and Governance

"This is an indispensable aid to the busy company secretary. The text is clear, the precedents...

Available in Company Law Online
Advising the Family Owned Business

Advising the Family Owned Business

Offers practical advice to lawyers on dealing with family business clients

Subscribe to our newsletters