In the recent case of South Coast Construction v Iverson Road Limited [2017] EWHC 61 (TCC), South Coast Construction ("South Coast") had obtained an adjudicator’s decision against the employer, Iverson Road Limited (“Iverson Road”), in a sum approaching £900,000. Iverson Road refused to pay the award so South Coast commenced enforcement proceedings in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC).

Summary

Clarification on when the court should lift the administration moratorium in respect of litigation.

The Facts

Introduction

Amit has recently acted for an IP whose office is one of the largest appointment takers in the country. He appeared for the respondent at several hearings on an application to review a BTO.

Background

The out-going officeholder had his licence revoked by the IPA for misappropriation of monies, running to six figures, from numerous estates. This resulted in a BTO, which was granted by the Court on paper.

The Facts

The applicants, who had successfully appealed the rejection of their proof of debt by the liquidator of Burnden Group Limited, sought an order that the liquidator pay their costs of the appeal personally in circumstances where the relevant company had no assets and their costs exceeded £290,000 (including VAT).

The Decision

When someone is made bankrupt, all property owned by them, at the date of bankruptcy, forms part of the bankruptcy estate. Property not only includes physical assets, such as goods, land and money, but also intangible assets, such as a cash balance with a bank, debts, benefits under contracts, legacies and causes of action. These assets are known as ‘things in action’. The bankruptcy estate vests in a trustee in bankruptcy upon appointment.

The Court of Appeal in Harvey v Dunbar Assets plc [2017] EWCA Civ 60 has confirmed that parties cannot re-litigate failed arguments that have previously been presented in bankruptcy proceedings.

This will be welcome news for creditors in situations where debtors rehearse the same arguments at several stages of the bankruptcy process in an attempt to deter enforcement by driving up legal costs and drawing out proceedings.

The facts

Registrar Baister overturned the adjudicator's decision in refusing to grant a Bankruptcy Order where the debtors COMI was an issue.

Mr Budniok, a German citizen who had recently moved to London, applied online for a Bankruptcy Order in England. After several requests for further information, the adjudicator was not satisfied Mr Budniok's centre of main interests ("COMI") was in England and as such refused the application. Mr Budniok appealed.

The Ministry of Justice has published the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (the “Protocol”), which comes into force on 1 October 2017. The Protocol applies to any business (including sole traders and public bodies) claiming payment of a debt (the “creditor”) from an individual (including a sole trader) (the “debtor”). It does not apply to business-to-business debts unless the debtor is a sole trader.

Aims of the Protocol

The aims of the Protocol are to:

This article was first published in Building Magazine, Issue 10, 10 March 2017.

Does an adjudication enforcement trump an insolvency moratorium? A recent case in the TCC has provided clear guidance on the issue.

Creditors' Bankruptcy Petition

The rules for these petitions are contained in 10.6 to 10.33. This section also covers IVA supervisors making a petition. The good news is that under the new Rules, there are very few changes to the current procedure.