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.

Insolvency Law

Expert guidance on all aspects of corporate and personal insolvency

Guildhall Chambers , 20 MAY 2014

Latest Cases May 2014

Latest Cases May 2014

Re Game Retail Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 180

(Court of Appeal, Patten, Lewison and Sharp LJJ, 24 February 2014)

Where an office holder retains possession of property for the benefit of the winding-up or administration, rent will be treated as accruing from day to day and payable as an expense of the winding-up or administration. Leisure (Norwich) II Ltd v Luminar Lava Ignite Ltd and Goldacre (Offices) Ltd v Nortel Networks UK Ltd were overruled.

Re Casa Estates (UK) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 383; [2014] All ER (D) 33 (Apr)

(Court of Appeal, Sullivan, McFarlane and Lewison LJJ, 3 April 2014)

Where a company was only able to continue to pay its debts as they fell due by taking new deposits, and using them to pay off old debts, in any commercial sense the company was insolvent, whether on a cash flow basis or a balance sheet basis. The Court of Appeal rejected the argument that if a company is cash-flow solvent, there is no need to consider whether it is also balance sheet solvent, unless it has contingent or prospective liabilities.

Re Brown Bear Foods Ltd [2014] EWHC 1132 (Ch); [2014] All ER (D) 101 (Apr)

(Chancery Division, His Honour Judge Simon Barker QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court), 10 April 2014)

The court declined to make an administration order notwithstanding that the conditions in para 11 Sch B1 to the Insolvency Act were clearly satisfied. The administration application had been made because there was a pending winding-up petition against the company. There was evidence of substantial post-petition dispositions by the company to connected parties and/or for non-business purposes and other unexplained (and potentially unjustifiable) transactions. In the circumstances, the court transferred in the pending petition, called it on for hearing and appointed a provisional liquidator.

Kaye v South Oxfordshire District Council [2013] EWHC 4165 (Ch); [2014] BPIR 416

(Chancery Division, His Honour Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court), 6 December 2013)

The liability to pay non-domestic rates is a single liability for the whole of the relevant chargeable financial year, notwithstanding that such liability may be discharged in instalments. Such liability falls within the definition of ‘debt’ in r 13.12 IR. In consequence, a local authority was bound by a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) containing r3’s standard terms (condition 20 of which incorporates r 13.12 IR) in respect of the entire year’s liability and could not take steps to recover instalments falling due for payment after the CVA was approved.

LSI 2013 LTD v Solar Panel Co (UK) Ltd [2014] EWHC 248 (Ch)

(Chancery Division, His Honour Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court), 14 January 2014)

The petitioner presented a winding-up petition against the debtor company on the basis of unpaid invoices. In advance of the hearing, the debtor filed a witness statement in which it admitted that it was unable to pay its debts as they fell due but disputed that it was indebted to the petitioner. The exhibit to that statement included draft CVA proposals in which the petitioner was listed as a contingent creditor in the sum of £1. At the hearing, the debtor sought an adjournment of the petition to a longer hearing to determine whether there was a genuine dispute on substantial
grounds. However, the deputy district judge made a winding-up order on the basis that the petitioner was a contingent creditor and the company was admittedly insolvent.

On appeal, His Honour Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) held that the deputy district judge had fallen into error and, in any event, should have exercised his discretion not to make a winding-up order on the basis of a £1 debt. Accordingly, he set aside the winding-up order. However, he declined to dismiss the petition since the debtor had only sought an adjournment at the original hearing.

Lakehouse Contracts Ltd v UPR Services Ltd

(Henderson J, 26 February 2014)

Where a winding-up petition was struck out the grounds that the petition debt was genuinely disputed on substantial grounds, but the debtor company had unreasonably refused the petitioner’s request to mediate the underlying dispute before the costs of the disputed petition exceeded the petition debt, the company was entitled to its costs of resisting the petition on the indemnity basis up to the point at which its own conduct of the litigation became unreasonable.

Guildhall Chambers
Bankruptcy and Personal Insolvency Reports

Bankruptcy and Personal Insolvency Reports

"BPIR is an excellent series, of interest to both corporate and personal insolvency lawyers,...

More Info from £185.99
Available in Lexis®Library
Individual Voluntary Arrangements

Individual Voluntary Arrangements

"This is the ultimate statement of where the law on IVAs is to be found in our great common law...

Available in Lexis®Library