Key Point

The word “advance” does not automatically imply an obligation to repay the funds advanced, nor does it automatically imply a repayment trigger.

The Facts

Key point

Whilst a winding up petition is not the appropriate forum to conduct a “mini trial”, the court is not bound to dismiss the petition if the dispute raised by the debtor company lacks substance.

The facts

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

In March 2015 the coalition government issued a call for evidence to understand in more detail the employee consultation process when a company is facing insolvency. Last month the government issued its Response. This attracted 28 responses from organisations including law firms, trade unions, insolvency practitioners and professional bodies.

Insolvency practitioners (‘IP’s) tasked with dealing with an often failing business for the purposes of protecting creditors’ interests face a number of issues. The Regulator has sought to provide clarity in two particular areas that IPs come across in their work by issuing notes (the ‘Notes’) on these issues (September 2015).

Trustee Appointments

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 Points

• Receivers only owe a duty of care to those parties who hold an interest in the equity of redemption.
• Upon the making of a bankruptcy order, the bankrupt ceases to participate in any such interest and the equity of redemption vests in the trustee in bankruptcy.

The Facts

Key Points

• An administrator may be able appeal an order restoring a company following dissolution
• The court has jurisdiction to backdate a winding up order made following restoration to the date of dissolution
• The court must exercise its discretion to do so with extreme caution

The Facts

Client Connection Limited (“Company”) was placed into administration and Ms Sharma (“A”) was appointed as administrator. Following a pre-pack sale of the business of the Company, A moved the Company to dissolution.

Key Points

• Court considers the ownership of assets situated at premises owned by the bankrupt in the context of limited relevant evidence
• Court emphasises the importance of joining the correct parties to litigation

The Facts

On 22 April 2015, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Jetivia SA v Bilta (UK) Limited, unanimously holding that where a company has been the victim of wrong-doing by its directors, that wrong-doing should not be attributed to the company so as to afford the directors an illegality defence.

The result is clear and not a surprising one. The judgments are less clear however. The Court highlighted the difficulties in developing illegality principles of general application for future cases, but then decided now was not the time to try.