Fulltext Search

Over the last few years, the courts have shown themselves to be increasingly unwilling to interfere in the level of liquidated damages set in building contracts. The courts have taken this position predominantly because the agreed level of liquidated damages forms part of the commercial bargain reached between the parties at the outset of the contract. However, employers should still carefully calculate the level of liquidated damages inserted into the contract for the following reasons:

Landlords are often placed at a disadvantage when an insolvent tenant company enters into administration. The landlord will not be a secured or preferred creditor where its tenant does not pay the rent, and the landlord cannot forfeit the lease for non-payment of rent without permission of the court.

For those institutions carrying out building projects at the moment the recent news that the holding company of Currie & Brown was in administration at the time of its acquisition by Middle East-based consultant Dar Group raised fresh concerns that there may be more victims of this period of economic instability. The insolvency of a consultant can be as harmful to a project as that of the main contractor. Well-drafted documentation is essential to protect an employer, as is ensuring that all requests for payment are justified.

For landlords, a tenant in administration is just about your worst nightmare. A moratorium prevents you from suing for outstanding arrears or forfeiting the lease and you may be left with an empty unit generating no income.  

Now it seems if administrators are using your premises, the rent might not even be paid as an expense simply because of when they were appointed. So what has happened?

The recent news that the holding company of Currie & Brown was in administration at the time of its acquisition by Middle East-based consultant Dar Group raises fresh concerns that there may be more victims of this period of economic instability.

The Insolvency Service has recently published a helpful guide about the restrictions on the re-use of a name previously used by a company, which has gone into liquidation. Directors of companies in insolvent liquidation need to take special care, as the restriction applies to them personally and contravention is a criminal offence. The restriction lasts for five years from the date of liquidation and, save in limited circumstances, a director is not allowed to be a director of or take part in the promotion, formation or management of a limited company that uses a "prohibited name".

A new practice direction on insolvency proceedings came into force on 23 February 2012. It contains procedural requirements for various aspects of proceedings under the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Insolvency Rules 1986.

The common law has long recognized a secured creditor’s duty to provide reasonable notice to borrowers before enforcing its security and appointing a receiver. The practical importance of this has become less significant since the codification of the principle of reasonable notice in section 244 of theBankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”). However, in the recent case of Bank of Montreal v.

As the economic clouds continue to darken and the threat of a double-dip recession increases, concern about exposure to unsecured bad debts will inevitably dominate the agenda of many companies. If the worst happens and a significant bad debt is incurred, many creditors are reluctant to review the possibilities afforded to them by the Insolvency Act 1986 and seek the solace of VAT bad debt relief. This is often the case even where it is suspected that the directors of the insolvent company have been culpable of misconduct.

Appointing administrators out of court has been thrown into complete disarray following Sir Andrew Morritt’s comments in Minmar. In that case, he said a directors’ out of court appointment would have been invalid if the company had not been given notice of the intention to appoint administrators.