Background
Key Point
The liquidation of an agent for service appointed by a Borrower under a loan agreement did not prevent the Lender from validly serving process on the Borrower by delivering documents to that agent.
The facts
A loan agreement contained the following clause:
"Service of process. Without prejudice to any other mode of service allowed under any relevant laws, each Borrower -
Key points
The court has jurisdiction to order the UK Registrar of Companies to replace previously filed administrators' proposals.
The Facts
The administrators of a company filed a statement of proposals with the Registrar but then sought to replace the proposals because they contained information that the company was obliged to keep confidential. The administrators argued that:
Key Point
The Graham Review into pre-pack administrations suggests beefing up SIP16 and creating new steps in the sale process where the sale is to a connected party but stops short of proposing new legislation.
The Graham Review
Key Point
Neither failure to obtain debtor's consent to modifications to an IVA proposal, prior to the creditors' meeting; nor the unauthorised exercise of a proxy at a creditors' meeting render an approved IVA a nullity.
The facts
Key point
Only a current liquidator or a current creditor has standing in an English liquidation to pursue a claim under section 212 of the Insolvency Act 1986 ("IA 86"). A former liquidator has no standing to apply to court to expunge a proof of debt (Insolvency Rule 4.85).
The facts
Blue Monkey Gaming v Hudson & Others
Insolvency professionals will welcome the High Court's decision in Blue Monkey Gaming Limited v Hudson & Others [2014] which is clear authority that the onus is upon retention of title claimants, not administrators, to locate and identify retention of title goods. The court made clear that to require the administrator to identify retention of title goods would be "totally unrealistic and practically unworkable."
In a landmark decision Pillar Denton Ltd and Others v Jervis and Others [2014] EWCA Civ 180, a group of the UK's largest landlords have successfully overturned previous High Court cases that had allowed insolvent tenants to continue trading from their premises without paying rent. The landlords in this case, which involved the retailer GAME, have been allowed to recover £3,000,000 in outstanding rents from the period of the tenant's administration.
But is it GAME over?
Pillar Denton Ltd and Others v Jervis and Others [2014] EWCA Civ 180
Summary – What happened?
A group of the UK's largest landlords have successfully overturned previous High Court decisions that had allowed insolvent tenants to continue trading from their premises without paying rent. The landlords in this case, which involved the retailer GAME, have been allowed to recover £3,000,000 in outstanding rents from the period of the tenant's administration.
Key point
An English winding up does not cease to have effect when an overseas company is dissolved under the law of its state of incorporation.
The facts
Agrenco Madeira – Comercio Internacional LDA (the "Company") was incorporated under the laws of Portugal in March 2004. The Company presented a winding up petition in England in August 2009. Its centre of main interests was in Brazil and therefore the EC Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings did not apply. The Company was wound up in England as an unregistered company in October 2009.