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
    Insolvency Rules 2016 - Re-use of company names
    2017-04-24

    Section 216 continues to apply to prohibit the re-use of a name or sufficiently similar name where oldco and newco have common directors.

    The relevant rules now dealing with the exceptions are contained in new rules 22.1 - 22.7.

    The three exceptions remain broadly the same but there are some key differences to note.

    Exceptions to the prohibition

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Ashfords LLP
    Authors:
    Katie Farmer
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Ashfords LLP
    Preston and another v Green and others, Re Cre8atsea Ltd [2016] EWHC 2522 (Ch)
    2017-04-25

    The case confirmed that the provisions of the CPR apply to applications for an extension of time to apply for rescission of a winding up order. The case further stated that any such extensions of time should be exceptional and for a very short period.

    Facts

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Gatehouse Chambers, Liquidation, High Court of Justice (England & Wales)
    Authors:
    Wendy Parker
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Gatehouse Chambers
    New Insolvency Rules - Are Your Commercial Agreements Up-To-Date?
    2017-04-25

    On 6 April 2017, new Insolvency Rules came into force which will affect creditors’ rights in most insolvency procedures. More information on the insolvency changes generally are available in this blog post.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Squire Patton Boggs, Debtor
    Authors:
    Gillian Dennis
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Squire Patton Boggs
    South Coast Construction Ltd v Iverson Road Ltd [2017] EWHC 61 (TCC)
    2017-04-25

    Facts

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Construction, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Gatehouse Chambers, Breach of contract, Liquidated damages, Insolvency Act 1986 (UK)
    Authors:
    Phillip Patterson
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Gatehouse Chambers
    Ecology Services Ltd v Hellard [2017] EWHC 160 (Ch)
    2017-04-25

    Facts

    This case concerned the rejection by the liquidators of Saff One LLP (‘LLP’) of a proof of debt lodged by ESS. The issue was whether a tax mitigation structure involving a loan to LLP for purported investment in the Ultra Green Scheme gave rise to a provable debt if the monies ‘loaned’ passed in a circle and no such investment was made.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Tax, Gatehouse Chambers, Limited liability partnership, Debt, Liquidation, Liquidator (law), Secured loan, High Court of Justice (England & Wales)
    Authors:
    Sara Benbow
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Gatehouse Chambers
    Re Ellison (A Bankrupt); Hicken (as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Ellison) v Ellison [2016] EWHC 2791 (Ch)
    2017-04-25

    Facts

    A Trustee in Bankruptcy (‘TiB’) applied for committal of a bankrupt (‘B’) for contempt for repeated failure to provide financial information sought in conjunction with an application for an Income Payment Order (‘IPO’).

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Gatehouse Chambers, Bankruptcy, Insolvency Act 1986 (UK)
    Authors:
    Harriet Ter-Berg
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Gatehouse Chambers
    Mikki v Duncan [2016] EWCA Civ 1312
    2017-04-25

    Facts

    Mr Mikki is a photographer (‘the Bankrupt’). Bankruptcy was 2010 when pertinently he had a bank account with £1,500 in it and a car.

    The £1,500 was spent, but £3,000 was subsequently paid in. When the account was frozen it again had £1,500 in it. After investigations it was determined that this money derived from post-bankruptcy income and was returned. Those investigations took some time and the Bankrupt demanded penal interest.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Gatehouse Chambers, Bankruptcy, Liquidation
    Authors:
    Jonathan Titmuss
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Gatehouse Chambers
    Insolvency Rules 2016 - Application for income payments orders and income payments agreements
    2017-04-26

    The rules relating to income payment orders ("IPO") and income payment agreements ("IPA") are largely unchanged. The time periods dictated in the old rules for IPOs and IPAs remain the same, however there are some added requirements in the new rules, particularly in relation to the contents of notices and orders.

    Rule 10.109 Application for income payments order (section 310)

    […]

    (4) the notice to the bankrupt must be authenticated and dated by the trustee.

    Rule 10.110 Order for income payments order

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Ashfords LLP
    Authors:
    Olivia Bridger
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Ashfords LLP
    Pre-action Disclosure - Peel Port Shareholder Finance Co v Dornoch Ltd
    2017-04-26

    Whether third party claimant entitled to pre-action disclosure of currently solvent insured's insurance policy

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Clyde & Co LLP
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Clyde & Co LLP
    On the verge of administration? No QFCH = No Breathing Space!
    2017-04-26

    Following obiter comments in the recent Court of Appeal decision in JCAM Commercial Real Estate XV Limited v David Haulage Limited[1]practitioners must now review their stance on the use of a Notice of Intention to Appoint Administrators (“NoI”) where there is no qualifying floating charge holder (“QFCH”). This is a blow to the flexibility of the administration process as a rescue procedure.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Irwin Mitchell LLP, Court of Appeal of England & Wales
    Authors:
    Frank Bouette
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Irwin Mitchell LLP

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 628
    • Page 629
    • Page 630
    • Page 631
    • Current page 632
    • Page 633
    • Page 634
    • Page 635
    • Page 636
    • …
    • 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