A case of two companies, one incorporated in Dubai and the other in England, involved in a network of businesses producing contrived fancy colour diamond valuations were eventually wound up by English courts in the interest of the public.
This article was first published in Insolvency Intelligence 2017, 30(5), 85-87.
In an earlier edition of this publication I identified what appeared to be a growing trend for the making of a draconian form of order suspending the discharge of bankruptcies. This form of order is typically associated with the case of Mawer v Bland where Mrs Justice Rose upheld on appeal the following order made by Chief Registrar Baister:
Marex Financial Limited v. Carlos Sevilleja Garcia [2017] EWHC 918 (Comm)
This recent decision on a jurisdictional challenge has provided greater clarity and potentially created a tortious cause of action where a debtor dissipates assets prior to judgment and subsequent freezing order.
Background
On 2 March Cambridgeshire-based merchant WellGrain went into administration, reportedly owing at least £15m to almost 300 creditors, many of those being farmers.
The administrators' report has now been published and indicates that the unsecured creditors - including some 155 farmers - will expect to receive between 1.4 - 6.7 pence for every pound they are owed.
It is an announcement which will no doubt be met with dismay by those creditors. However, it is not unusual that unsecured creditors of an insolvent company will receive little or no payment.
This recent decision on a jurisdictional challenge has provided greater clarity and potentially created a tortious cause of action where a debtor dissipates assets prior to judgment and subsequent freezing order.
Background
Karhoo, a US incorporated company able to benefit from the Chapter 15 US bankruptcy code provision for foreign insolvency proceedings following UK Administration.
De Le Cuona v Big Apple Marketing Ltd, Chancery Division, 12 April 2017
Easement to park; illusory; true construction of a deed
In the matter of the désastres of Gail Alison Cochrane and Orb a.r.l.
1. Harbour Fund II LP v. (1) Orb a.r.l. (2) Litigation Capital Funding [2017]JRC171 ("the September judgment")
2. Harbour Fund II LP v. (1) Orb a.r.l. (2) Dr Gail Cochrane [2017]JRC007 ("the January judgment")
3. Representation of the Viscount re Cochrane and Orb a.r.l. [2017]JRC025 ("the February judgment")
The procedure for an application to Court for the appointment of an Administrator pursuant to paragraph 12 of Schedule B1 IA 86 is covered by r3.3-3.15 of the 2016 rules.
Key points to note: