Another interesting summary in the Times reporting on the staggering levels of fraud committed against the UK taxpayer during the pandemic. Whilst the Insolvency Service are clearly doing their best to hold fraudsters to account through disqualification orders and similar punitive measures, it appears that we are no closer to a financial recovery of any meaningful value, or at the very least imposing real financial pain on those who took advantage of the country’s generosity in the face of the unprecedented challenges of the Covid pandemic.

簡介

最近在Re Klimvest plc [2022] EWHC 596 (Ch) 一案中，英國高等法院（「法院」）基於一個比較罕見的理由頒令將一家上市公司清盤——失去公司基礎（loss of substratum），即公司放棄其主要宗旨和目的。

背景

Klimvest Plc（「該公司」）於2019年1月出售其業務及資產，其後其唯一重大資產為約800萬英鎊的現金儲備。出售資產後，該公司的最大股東Klimt Invest SA（「第一答辯人」）要求該公司動用出售所得款項作出新投資，而非將在清盤中分派予股東。

Eric Duneau先生（「呈請人」）要求根據英國《1986年無力償債法》第122(1)(g) 條頒令該公司清盤，認為由於該公司已失去其目的或基礎，將該公司清盤屬公正公平。第一答辯人反對呈請，辯稱（其中包括）該公司並無失去其目的或基礎，因為該公司在出售資產前實質上已成為一間控股投資公司，公司的目的仍可透過該投資實現。

失去公司基礎的測試

Introduction

In the recent case of Re Klimvest plc [2022] EWHC 596 (Ch), the English High Court (”Court”) ordered the winding up of a public company on a relatively uncommon ground - loss of substratum, i.e. – the abandonment of a company’s main object and purpose.

Background

As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues, governments around the world are coordinating and responding with increasingly severe sanctions and export controls on Russian entities, institutions, and individuals. Insolvency practitioners first wonder whether sanctioned entities, or entities connected to sanctioned individuals, can enter into an insolvency procedure and, if so, how does the insolvency practitioner accept an appointment and get paid?

In the case of Caversham Finance Limited (in administration) [2022] EWHC 789, the court considered whether errors in a notice to creditors seeking consent to extend an administration made the extension invalid. This case is important as it shows the court’s approach to omission of prescribed information in notices to creditors.

简介

最近在Re Klimvest plc [2022] EWHC 596 (Ch) 一案中，英国高等法院（「法院」）基于一个比较罕见的理由颁令将一家上市公司清盘——失去公司基础（loss of substratum），即公司放弃其主要宗旨和目的。

背景

Klimvest Plc（「该公司」）于2019年1月出售其业务及资产，其后其唯一重大资产为约800万英镑的现金储备。出售资产后，该公司的最大股东Klimt Invest SA（「第一答辩人」）要求该公司动用出售所得款项作出新投资，而非将在清盘中分派予股东。

Eric Duneau先生（「呈请人」）要求根据英国《1986年无力偿债法》第122(1)(g) 条颁令该公司清盘，认为由于该公司已失去其目的或基础，将该公司清盘属公正公平。第一答辩人反对呈请，辩称（其中包括）该公司并无失去其目的或基础，因为该公司在出售资产前实质上已成为一间控股投资公司，公司的目的仍可透过该投资实现。

失去公司基础的测试

An increasing body of English case law has recognised cryptocurrencies as a form of property giving rise to the possibility of insolvency clawback claims involving cryptoassets.

Recent developments

In May 2021, the UK Government published a Consultation which set out its proposals for targeted (but significant) amendments to certain aspects of the existing UK insolvency arrangements for insurers.

Not a day goes by without a media article referring to the ongoing global energy crisis. There are a number of factors which have contributed to the crisis including the huge increase in wholesale natural gas prices, which have risen some 250% since the start of 2021. Since the start of last year, over 30 energy firms have gone bust in the UK alone.

When a supplier fails, the energy regulator (Ofgem) has two routes available to ensure the continued provision of supply for affected customers:

The High Court has allowed an application for an order to enable access to a bankrupt’s pension to satisfy debts arising from fraud. Prior to the bankruptcy, judgment was obtained against him for £3.2m plus costs.