In Re SCL Group Ltd (& others) [2019] EWHC 954 (Ch), the High Court considered a range of allegations concerning the administrators to the Cambridge Analytica group and whether they should be appointed as liquidators following a failed sale process.

Central to the case were allegations of misconduct and potential bias against a particular creditor. The claims were rejected. But, the case contains useful observations about the role of administrators and their duties:

The High Court has confirmed that a sale by a receiver to a buyer connected with the mortgagee does not engage the self-dealing rule and further considered the extent of the duties on an enforcement sale.

Lehman’s ‘unknown unknowns’, and the secrets that came to light

This article was first published on the Financial Times website on 10 September 2018.

When the administrators and lawyers walked into the Bank Street offices of Lehman Brothers on a sunny Sunday afternoon ten years ago, little did they know the complexity of the task which awaited them.

For all their vast experience, legal knowledge and financial acumen, this was a major challenge.

The High Court has given judgment in a case (G4S plc v G4S Trustees Ltd) about whether a defined benefit (DB) scheme which was closed to future accrual, but whose members' benefits continued to be linked to final salary, was a "frozen" scheme for the purposes of the employer debt legislation. The Court has decided that the final salary link did not mean that the members were in pensionable service and, as a result, the scheme was frozen. This is important for employers (and trustees) of closed schemes where the members retain a final salary link.

Year in Review - United Arab Emirates Law in 2016