Dispute Resolution analysis: A Court, cost-managing a claim under s423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 has strongly criticised the level of anticipated costs reflected in cost budgets and have made an order reflecting the view formed.
Lemos and ors v Church Bay Trust Company Limited [2023] EWHC 157 (Ch)
What are the practical implications of this case?
Dispute Resolution analysis: A large award of damages and/or equitable compensation has been made against the directors and connected companies of a company which was used to perpetrate a large scale labour supply fraud against HMRC.
Umbrella Care Ltd v Nisa and ors [2022] EWHC 3139 (Ch)
What are the practical implications of this case?
The Insolvency and Companies Court has recognised Chapter 11 Proceedings in the US in respect of the manufacturer of controversial surgical mesh products which have generated a significant number of claims worldwide. The British Claimants have had their claims stayed as a result of this recognition.
Re Astora Women’s Health LLC [2022] EWHC 2412 (Ch)
What are the practical implications of this case?
Restructuring and Insolvency analysis: The respondents to a claim brought by the joint liquidators of BHS Group companies have successfully struck out parts of claims brought under sections 212 and 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) on the basis of open-ended pleadings as to the relevant date of knowledge that insolvent liquidation was inevitable and trading should have ceased.
Chandler v Wright and others [2022] EWHC 2205 (Ch)
What are the practical implications of this case?
Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court has granted an application to wind up a company incorporated in Luxembourg in a decision which sheds light on the application of cross-border insolvency principles following the UK’s departure from the European Union.
Barings (UK) Limited and ors v Galapagos SA [2022] EWHC 1633 (Ch)
What are the practical implications of this case?
King & Ors v Kings Solutions Group Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1099 (Ch)
Background
This appeal arose in the context of long-running and complex dispute between the shareholders of Kings Solutions Group Limited (‘the Company’).
New requirements brought in during the Covid-19 pandemic have added to the potential procedural pitfalls facing creditors seeking a winding up order in recent months. They have also led to quite a lot of adjourned hearings and delays.
Dispute Resolution analysis: Deputy ICCJ Schaffer has dismissed an application brought by the Respondents to a claim brought by the Joint Liquidators of BHS Group Ltd for wrongful trading. The failure to plead the relevant quantum of the claim was not a deficiency which merited strike-out.
Re BHS Group Ltd [2021] EWHC 3501 (Ch)
What are the practical implications of this case?
There has been much discussion concerning the recent district court appellate decision in Purdue Pharma. See In re Purdue Pharma, Case No. 21 cv 7532 (Master Case), 2021 WL 5979108 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2021). We have been tracking developments relating to Purdue Pharma and issues concerning third-party releases: Purdue Pharma: Is Protection of Third Parties by the Automatic Stay an Oxymoron?
On May 7, 2021, we issued a legal alert regarding third-party releases as part of the plan of reorganization in the Perdue Pharma case. [Purdue Pharma: Is Protection of Third Parties by the Automatic Stay an Oxymoron?] The order confirming that plan was appealed and our subsequent legal alert dated December 21, 2021 discussed the decision by Judge Colleen McMahon of the U.S.