The High Court’s recent decision in Reid-Roberts v Mei-Lin [2026] EWHC 49 (Ch) regarding WhatsApp communications may cause you to reconsider whether to add a moniker to your messages. While this decision related to s53 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (“LPA”) the principles set out in the judgment have wider-ranging significance, as they apply to any requirement for a document to be signed.
Background
The High Court’s recent decision in Reid-Roberts v Mei-Lin [2026] EWHC 49 (Ch) regarding WhatsApp communications may cause you to reconsider whether to add a moniker to your messages. While this decision related to s53 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (“LPA”) the principles set out in the judgment have wider-ranging significance, as they apply to any requirement for a document to be signed.
Background
In Webb and another (as liquidators of Eversholt Rail (365) Limited (in liquidation)) v Eversholt Rail Limited and another [2026] EWHC 101 (Ch), the High Court dismissed the liquidators’ appeal against a decision not to allow their extensive application for the production of documents under s.235 and s.236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). The application had sought to reconstitute a special purpose company’s full corporate knowledge in circumstances where it had held no documents of its own.
In Short
Aerovias del Continente Americano SA Avianca & Ors v Versilia Solutions Ltd [2026] EWHC 282 (Ch) covers well trodden ground on the limits to the powers of a provisional liquidator and how, in certain circumstances, they can be overcome, in this case by seeking ratification of the sale of the company’s assets.
The English High Court has again been called upon to consider the validity and legal impact of dealings conducted via WhatsApp.
Background
The Court of Appeal has handed down its judgment in DG Resources Ltd v The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, a decision that clarifies how winding‑up petitions must be served, an issue with implications for the 30,000 UK businesses using the Companies House default address for receiving official mail.
Background
DG Resources Ltd owed HMRC £1.104 million.
On 11 December 2024 HMRC presented DG Resources with a winding-up petition.
The petition came before Chief ICC Judge Briggs, who made several key findings:
The casual dining and hospitality sector is navigating a period of profound upheaval, driven by macroeconomic pressures, regulatory uncertainty, and shifting consumer preferences. In this context, private equity and credit funds also face mounting distress, divergent brand fortunes, and a growing need for legal and transactional agility.
In autumn of 2025, the English High Court decided that liquidators have unlimited personal exposure: they cannot contractually limit or exclude their personal liability for breach of duty. An application for permission to appeal that decision is now before the Court of Appeal.
The English Court of Appeal has recently provided important guidance on transactions at an undervalue pursuant to s.238 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (“IA 86”) in the case of TAQA Bratani Ltd v Fujairah Oil and Gas UK LLC.