If a company goes into liquidation, the liquidator is able to disclaim the whole of an insolvent tenant’s liability under a lease. The disclaimer ends all of the tenant’s rights, interests and liabilities, effectively meaning that the tenant can get out of the lease early. This can have a significant impact on a landlord, whose expected income from the property suddenly comes to an end.

Key points

The High Court has recently considered a number of questions of contractual construction in the context of guarantees: Barclays Bank plc v Price & Ors [2018] EWHC 2719 (Comm). 

This article first appeared in Corporate Rescue & Insolvency, December 2018.

Key points

Despite the debtor's contention that his primary residence was in the United States, the Court held that it had jurisdiction to make a Bankruptcy Order following a petition presented by HMRC.

HMRC presented a bankruptcy petition against Robert Stayton on 30 May 2014 who owed approximately £653,640. The matter came before the court on a number of occasions before the final hearing, with judgment being handed down in November 2018.

The Court applied sections 423-425 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA) to the transfer of an interest in a Ukrainian television station. When analysing the Defendant's actions the Court considered the transaction was made for a prohibited purpose.

Background

To no great surprise, the Global Corporate v Hale appeal decision has gone against the director. The Court of Appeal handed down the eagerly awaited judgment on 27 November 2018.

This article was first published on Lexis®PSL on 15 November 2018.

Crumpler and another (Joint liquidators of Peak Hotels and Resorts Ltd in liquidation) v Candey Ltd, [2018] EWCA Civ 2256, [2018] All ER (D) 78 (Oct).

What are the practical implications of this case for practitioners?

A High Court Master has found that the court must maintain privilege in the documents of a dissolved company unless and until there is no prospect of the company being restored to the register: Addlesee v Dentons Europe LLP: [2018] EWHC 3010 (Ch).

Directors cannot avoid unlawful distribution claims by asserting that dividends should be retroactively re-categorised as remuneration for services they have provided to the company, the Court of Appeal has confirmed in Global Corporate v Hale [2018] EWCA Civ 2618

The court confirmed that the legality of a payment to directors must be tested at the time when it is made. Any "subsequent realisation that the distributions should not have been made" will not cure an unlawful distribution.