Kingsley Napley is pleased to report the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith DBE in the case of Re MPB Developments Ltd [2025], which represents an excellent result for our client.

We act for the petitioners in long running litigation. Two years ago, our clients presented a creditors’ winding up petition, together with a contributory’s winding up petition on the just and equitable basis and an unfair prejudice petition.

Introduction

On 20 May 2025, Mr Justice Marcus Smith handed down his eagerly-awaited judgment sanctioning the two inter-conditional restructuring plans (the Plans) proposed by members of the Petrofac Group. The judgment raises issues described as “going to the heart of the Part 26A regime” and is significant as the first case to consider the application of the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Thames Water.

The judgment addresses three particularly interesting points:

The Supreme Court has handed down a decision in Bilta (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) and othersv Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2025] UKSC 18, which clarifies the parties who ar

On 7 May 2025, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) handed down a judgment providing useful guidance on the meaning of “fraudulent trading” within s.213 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (Insolvency Act) and how the test in s.32(1) of the Limitation Act 1980 (Limitation Act) operates, in Bilta (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) v Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2025] UKSC 18 (Bilta). In this article, we give a brief summary of the facts, issues and rulings in the judgment and its practical implications for Hong Kong’s corporate insolvency regime.

Background

Written by - James Conomos

Financial difficulties can creep up on a business when least expected. Whether it’s due to market shifts, unexpected costs, or operational setbacks, many businesses find themselves at a crossroads: How do we turn this around before it’s too late? The key is acting early and having the right plan in place.

It’s hard to write a pithy article about the transfer of proceedings from the High Court in London to the Central London County Court (CLCC), but given its wide-reaching implications I thought it was worth a try.

Overview

On 8 April 2025, Mr Justice Marcus Smith delivered judgment granting Petrofac Limited and Petrofac International (UAE) LLC (the Plan Companies) permission to convene creditor meetings in respect of two inter-conditional restructuring Plans (the Plans). The fulsome judgment, following hearings on 28 February and 20 March, contains a number of interesting points:

The UK Supreme Court’s recent decision in El-Husseini and another v Invest Bank PSC [2025] UKSC 4 has clarified the circumstances in which section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the Act) provides protection against attempts by debtors to “defeat their creditors and make themselves judgment-proof.” This is a critical decision for insolvency practitioners, any corporate or fund which is involved in distressed deals and beyond to acquirers who were not aware they were dealing in distressed assets.

Overview

Insolvency practitioners will be familiar with section 283A of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the "Act") and what is commonly termed the 'use it or lose it' provisions. But what exactly is meant by a trustee in bankruptcy being informed or becoming aware of a bankrupt's interest in a property for the purposes of section 283A(5) of the Act?

At first instance, a bankrupt's claim that she had informed her trustee or that her trustee had become aware of such an interest was dismissed. The bankrupt appealed.