The facts
The Facts
On 31 July 2012, a bankruptcy order was made in respect of Mr Dean Jonathan D’Eye on the basis of a statutory demand dated 11 July 2011.
During their investigations, his trustees in bankruptcy discovered that Mr D’Eye had made a payment of £321,919 to his father on 24 January 2012 (the Payment) and, after the presentation of the bankruptcy petition on 28 May 2012, a significant portion of this money had then been used to purchase a flat (the Flat).
Key points
Creditors petitioning for bankruptcy must carefully consider offers to settle debts and make a reasonable decision based on the circumstances.
The facts
A bankrupt sought permission to appeal his bankruptcy order on the basis that the Deputy District Judge incorrectly held that the petitioning creditor did not act unreasonably in rejecting the bankrupt’s offer to compound the debt and, therefore, ought to have dismissed the petition pursuant to Section 271(3) of the Insolvency Act 1986.
The decision
Key point
Key point
The Court has discretion to suspend time for the purposes of limitation periods when exercising its jurisdiction to restore a company to the register.
The facts
The former director of a dissolved company applied for an order restoring the company and, so that it could then bring claims against third parties that had expired, suspending the running of time during the period when it was dissolved.
The decision
Key Point
There is no assumption under English law that, where a company appeals against a winding-up order, it should give security for costs.
The Facts
Key Point
An English Court holds that a rate saving scheme involving liquidations of tenant companies is an abuse of the English insolvency legislation.
The Facts
Key point
A statutory demand designed to achieve some connected or collateral purpose is not necessarily invalid.
The facts
Key point
A Court always has discretion whether to set aside a statutory demand based upon cross claims.
The facts
A debtor applied to Court to have a statutory demand set aside on the basis that he had a counter claim which, if set against the debt, would leave less than £750 outstanding.
The decision
Key Point
A distressed debt purchaser may be able to rely on misrepresentations made by the borrower to the original lender in published documents to recover loss.
The Facts
An Irish investment company ("Taberna") claimed damages for misrepresentations made by or on behalf of a large Danish bank ("Roskilde"), in investor presentation documents and annual results, which induced Taberna to enter into a secondary market purchase of subordinated notes originally issued by Roskilde.
The Decision