Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • Regions
      • Africa
      • Asia Pacific
      • Europe
      • North Africa/Middle East
      • North America
      • South America
    • Headlines
    • Education Resources
      • ABI Committee Articles
      • ABI Journal Articles
      • Covid 19
      • Conferences and Webinars
      • Newsletters
      • Publications
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    Failure to follow deemed consent procedure did not invalidate appointment
    2018-04-19

    In the recent case of Cash Generator Limited v Fortune and others [2018] EWHC 674 (Ch), the Court determined that non-compliance with the deemed consent procedure for nominating liquidators did not invalidate their appointment. The case provides a useful summary on the relatively new provisions governing the deemed consent procedure and welcome relief to Insolvency Practitioners (“IPs”) that a failure to fully comply with such provisions will not necessarily invalidate their appointment.

    Brief facts and arguments

    Filed under:
    Australia, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Liquidator (law)
    Authors:
    Oliver Ward-Jones
    Location:
    Australia
    Firm:
    Squire Patton Boggs
    Snooze and you lose in Slovakia
    2016-08-10

    A recent decision of the Slovak Courts suggest that if main proceedings have been opened in one member state and the debtor has assets in Slovakia, the insolvency practitioner in the main proceedings must act quickly and sell those assets before secondary proceedings are opened in Slovakia, otherwise he runs the risk of losing the assets to the secondary estate. Legal title to the assets must have passed to the buyer before the secondary proceedings are opened; it is not enough just for contracts to have been exchanged.

    Filed under:
    France, Slovakia, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Debtor, Interest, Liquidation, Liquidator (law), Article 8 ECHR, Trustee
    Authors:
    Silvia Belovicova , Alexandre Le Ninivin
    Location:
    France, Slovakia
    Firm:
    Squire Patton Boggs
    Parliament to consider preferential creditor status for consumers
    2016-08-03

    Consumers could be set to jump up the insolvency hierarchy if Parliament backs the latest Law Commission recommendations.

    The Law Commission’s report, Consumer Prepayments on Retailer Insolvency, recommends, among other things, that consumers who prepay for goods or services over £250 in the six months prior to a formal insolvency process should be paid out as preferential creditors instead of unsecured creditors.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Squire Patton Boggs, Credit card, Retail, Consumer protection, Unsecured debt, Debt, Liquidation, Liquidator (law), Consumer Rights Act 2015 (UK), Law Commission (England and Wales)
    Authors:
    Russell Hill , Matt Ford
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Squire Patton Boggs
    When an Asset is not an Asset
    2016-07-19

    The Court of Appeal has recently considered the status of contingent assets within the balance sheet test for insolvency in the context of a company’s inability to pay its debts. Under Section 123 Insolvency Act 1986, a company is deemed unable to pay its debts if its assets are less than its liabilities including contingent liabilities but nothing is said about the status of contingent assets.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Squire Patton Boggs, Shareholder, Dividends, Beneficiary, Debt, Liability (financial accounting), Balance sheet, Liquidator (law), Insolvency Act 1986 (UK), Court of Appeal of England & Wales
    Authors:
    Susan Kelly
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Squire Patton Boggs
    Stanford, liquidations and the Serious Fraud Office
    2011-05-01

    In relation to insolvent liquidations under U.K. law, one of the primary objectives will be the implementation of an efficient process to preserve and recover assets for the benefit of the creditors. This is particularly so where there is a need to instigate costly litigation or cross-border recognition proceedings and where the liquidator will want increased assurances as to the likelihood that those steps will generate positive returns.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, White Collar Crime, Jones Day, Injunction, Fraud, Money laundering, Liquidation, Liquidator (law), Prejudice, US Department of Justice, Serious Fraud Office (UK), Court of Appeal of England & Wales
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Jones Day
    You go bust, your assets are mine! The anti-deprivation rule considered
    2010-05-31

    There is something positively Dickensian when looking at the anti-deprivation rule (the "rule") and images come up of scribes working in dark and dismal rooms scratching their quills by dim candle light. Indeed, the rule dates back to the nineteenth century and many lawyers would be hard-pressed to explain it even if they are able to grasp the contradictions and fine distinctions thrown up by the old cases. In essence, the rule provides that a contractual provision is void if it provides for the transfer of an asset from the owner to a third party upon the insolvency of the owner.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Corporate Finance/M&A, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Jones Day, Share (finance), Royalty payment, Bankruptcy, Landlord, Leasehold estate, Joint venture, Liquidation, Fair market value, Common law, Articles of association, Liquidator (law), Lehman Brothers
    Authors:
    Michael Rutstein , Victoria Ferguson
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Jones Day
    Liquidators are not personally liable for payment of dividends
    2007-11-29

    In a judgment useful to insolvency practitioners, a court has recently confirmed that liquidators are not personally liable for payment of dividends. In Lomax Leisure v Miller and Bramston [2007] EWHC 2508 (Ch) Miller and Bramston faced personal claims on dividend cheques they had cancelled, after receiving a pending application from a creditor whose claim they had rejected. Miller and Bramstom were later replaced by a new liquidator who brought claims in the name of the company and various creditors.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, RPC, Debtor, Dividends, Liquidator (law), High Court of Justice
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    RPC
    A victory for common sense in the House of Lords
    2007-05-02

    On 2 May 2007 the House of Lords ruled that the mere appointment of a receiver was not enough for a company to recover damages for business contracts that were allegedly lost as a result of that appointment.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, RPC, Breach of contract, Interest, Solicitor, Intangible asset, Strict liability, Liquidator (law), Tangible property, House of Lords
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    RPC
    Important judgment on liquidators' ability to obtain documents
    2015-03-11

    Summary

    Filed under:
    Hong Kong, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, RPC, Liquidator (law)
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Firm:
    RPC
    Modified Universalism - privy to Singular clarification?
    2015-01-26

    While most jurisdictions provide liquidators with wide investigative powers to locate and realise assets locally, the exercise of such powers becomes more complicated when the assets are situated overseas. As more and more businesses expand globally and corporate structures become equally more complex, the liquidators’ task becomes more problematic in winding up such companies.

    Filed under:
    Hong Kong, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Private Client & Offshore Services, RPC, Common law, Liquidator (law)
    Authors:
    David Smyth
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Firm:
    RPC

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 58
    • Page 59
    • Page 60
    • Page 61
    • Current page 62
    • Page 63
    • Page 64
    • Page 65
    • Page 66
    • …
    • Next page ››
    • Last page Last »
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days