Court of Appeal denies input tax on accountancy services relating to arefinancing and restructuring process: Airtours Holiday Transport Limited vHMRC5
Again, of interest to all schemes providing defined benefits is the recent settlement in the litigation involving the Lehman Brothers Scheme, where the payment of £184 million, representing costs of the buying-out benefits, has been agreed.
Following a detailed investigation by TPR commencing in 2008, and a legal battle through the hierarchy of courts up to the Supreme Court (SC), members of the Lehman Brothers Pension Scheme will receive their full benefits after a settlement was reached on 18 August 2014.
UK PRA publishes SS9/14:
After six years of legal action and investigations, the Pensions Regulator (TPR) has agreed a £184 million settlement with PwC, administrators for the Lehman Brothers Group, which has secured members' benefits under the UK pension scheme. It also means the scheme will not go into the Pension Protection Fund (PPF).
Following the insolvency of the Lehman group in 2008, TPR began regulatory action in 2010 seeking the issue of a Financial Support Direction (FSD) to certain UK group companies. An FSD requires recipients to provide extra financial support to a scheme.
The UK Government has released a long awaited consultation document proposing new controls on IT suppliers’ dealings with customers facing insolvency.
To a degree this brings the termination provisions of the UK’s insolvency rescue regimes (administration and company voluntary arrangements) in line with some other jurisdictions, such as the US, which, broadly, do not allow supplier termination for customer insolvency.
Whether insurer liable to repay purchasers’ deposits following dissolution of developer/policy interpretation
Key Point
Key Point
Liability for utility bills arising in an administration after trading had ceased did not rank as an expense of the administration.
The facts
Key Point
The Court of Appeal has held that a UK company undergoing a financial restructuring was not entitled to recover VAT charged by accountants who prepared reports for the company's lenders use during the restructuring process.
The facts
Key Points
- Court cannot grant relief under the UK Cross Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 (CBIR) where it could not provide such relief in a domestic insolvency.
- Even if such option were possible, court would not do so where a contract is governed by English law.
- Possibility of effectively applying provisions of foreign law under the CBIR restricted.
The Facts