The Supreme Court's judgment in BTI v Sequana is long-awaited, and welcome. The court has confirmed that directors do have a common law creditors' duty, and that it works on a sliding scale basis.
Over the last two years, courtesy of a once-a-century pandemic, government-mandated business closures, nationwide stay-at-home orders, and—unprecedented—disruptions to the global supply chain have illuminated, previously unknown, vulnerabilities across a whole host of industries. Would anyone have seriously questioned the viability of office space two years ago? Now, inflation, in keeping with the recent chaos, may be upending the viability of another tried-and-tested institution: the supply contract.
The High Court has held that where companies have adopted the model articles without amendment, any sole director acting has the power to pass resolutions acting alone.
The long, long awaited Supreme Court Judgment in the Sequana case is finally here. Firstly, for those who may have forgotten what the Supreme Court was grappling with, the issue was 'whether the trigger for the directors’ duty to consider creditors is merely a real risk of, as opposed to a probability of or close proximity to, insolvency'.
You’ve gotta admire the Debtor in In re Deirdre Ventura.
Debtor has been fighting to save a Bed and Breakfast business through bankruptcy: beginning in 2018 with a regular Chapter 11, and then struggling to get into Subchapter V.
Debtor’s is a you-can’t-make-this-stuff-up story of persistence through adversity.
Debtor has survived, for example, an inexplicably-bad appellate opinion refusing to allow Debtor’s Subchapter V election. The appellate opinion declares:
This article is the China Chapter of Sporting Succession in Football, a publication by Sports and Policy Centre, print copy available at: http://www.sportslawandpolicycentre.com/
A. Applicable Regulation of the Member Association
The full strength of the economic headwinds facing the UK economy is not yet clear, but a helpful recent report by insolvency and restructuring adviser Begbies Traynor provided some useful numbers around the attitudes of businesses.
Before October 3, 2022, the rules of procedure in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (unlike those in most other appeal courts in Canada) imposed a stay of proceedings in most cases as soon as a Notice of Appeal was served and filed. That has now changed.
Robert Chan, instructed by Leon Lai & Co, represented D2-Leung Yung (“Leung”), the former Chief Executive Officer of Peace Mark (Holdings) Ltd, to resist the Plaintiffs’ application to amend their claim to include a plea of wilful default or wilful negligence.
The Supreme Court has refused permission for the case of Lock v Stanley to be appealed, meaning that the Court of Appeal’s approach to questions around the assignment by a liquidator of claims in the insolvent estate stands.
Most notably the Court of Appeal confirmed that a liquidator is under no duty to offer defendants the right to acquire the claims against them unless the failure to do so would be perverse.