Introduction

The recent decision of Andrew Burrows QC, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, in Palliser Limited v Fate Limited (In Liquidation) [2019] EWHC 43 (QB), is a useful reminder of the difficulties that can arise where one party (here a tenant) relies on another (its landlord) to take out insurance.

The Facts

In 2010, a fire started at the ground floor restaurant owned and operated by a company called Fate Limited (“Fate”). It was not in dispute that the fire was caused by Fate’s negligence.

Re SHB Realisation Ltd (formerly BHS Ltd); Wright and another (as joint liquidators of SHB Realisations Ltd (formerly BHS Ltd)) v Prudential Assurance Companies Ltd [2018] EWHC 402 (Ch); [2018] All ER (D) 58 (Mar)

Synopsis

自己破産というのは、借金を返すことがもう絶対にできないということを裁判所に理解してもらい、法律上で、借金をなくしてもらうことができるやり方です。生活する中で、最低限必要な財産以外のものは、何もかも失うことになります。 日本の国民であるならば、誰もが自己破産ができるのです。

本来、債務は自分で返済すべきですが、どうにも返済の見込みが立たないときには、債務整理を考えてみるべきです。 一般的に債務整理が必要かどうか判断するタイミングというのは、毎月の返済が収入の３割以上に及ぶ場合が妥当な時期のようです。任意整理で弁護士等を訪れるのはこのタイミングが一番多いです。予定していた日に返済が行われないと、貸した側から次の日には支払いに関しての連絡がくるでしょう。

次の支払い予定日を聞かれるのでそこで約束すれば、あとでしつこく電話がかかってくることもありません。

しかし、もしその期日に約束を果たさないと、また催促の連絡がきて、やがて訴訟に発展する可能性もあります。

どうあがいても返済不能な状態に陥ったら、任意整理、個人再生、自己破産といった債務手続きをするという手があります。

どういった形で債務者が借金を整理するかによって債務整理には４つの方法があります。

Whether liquidated damages (LDs) can be claimed after termination is a question which comes up regularly. It is very relevant in the current climate where contracts are often terminated following contractor insolvency. If I were devising a construction law exam paper, this classic question would undoubtedly appear.

Daniel Gatty discusses the recent High Court ruling in Leon v Her Majesty’s Attorney General and others [2018] EWHC 3026 (Ch) and its impact on the grant of vesting orders following the disclaimer of a lease.

Readers of this column will be aware of the complications that can ensue when a lease is disclaimed by a tenant’s liquidator under section 178 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), by a tenant’s trustee in bankruptcy under section 315 of the IA 1986 or by the Crown under section 1013 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) following dissolution of a tenant company.

This is the third occasion on which I have posted on this blog on the issue of after the event insurance (ATE) policies and the impact which they have on applications for security for costs.

In the first post on 16 November 2017, I praised the judgment of Snowden J in Premier Motorauctions v Pricewaterhouse Coopers for appearing to bring clarity to an area which had for some time struggled with near irreconcilable decisions.

On December 27th, Jonathan and I returned to the studio to record the latest podcast for The Bank Account. We haven’t discussed New Year’s Resolutions, but we’ll try to return to a little more normalcy in 2019!

This article first appeared in Corporate Rescue & Insolvency, December 2018.

Key points

Key points

We at the BCLP Global Insolvency and Restructuring Developments (the GRID) continue to watch and cover the growing jurisprudence of trustees seeking to recover pre-petition tuition payments made by a debtor parent to support his or her child’s college education.