The Insolvency and Companies Court, in A Company -v- Visionary Future LLC & ors. (unreported), has dismissed an application by a company seeking to strike out, or alternatively restrain advertisement of, a winding-up petition brought by creditors. The judgment underlines the critical importance of providing proper and substantiated evidence in insolvency proceedings.

Lewis Silkin acted for the petitioners (the respondents in the application), who have since been successful in winding up the company in question.

Inthe matter of Trinco (NSW) Pty Ltd (in liq) [2025] NSWSC 993, the New South Wales Supreme Court found Mr Azizi to be a de facto director of Trinco (NSW) Pty Ltd (in liq) (Trinco) and liable for insolvent trading. Trinco’s liquidator was awarded compensation, payable by Mr Azizi.

Equity of Exoneration and Joint Liability: Insights from Armstrong & Anor v Harrow [2025] EWHC 1790 (Ch)

On 18 July 2025, ICC Judge Mullen handed down judgment in Armstrong & Anor v Harrow [2025] EWHC 1790 (Ch) denying Mrs Harrow’s claim for an equity of exoneration to keep the full proceeds from the sale of the matrimonial home.

Key Points:

In a well-known episode of the comedy “Fawlty Towers”, hotel boss Basil Fawlty was frustrated. A guest had asked for a Waldorf salad. Basil had no idea how to make such a dish, and his attempts to do so were criticised by the guest.  

The landmark decision by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Stevanovich v Richardson¹provides authoritative guidance on the proper interpretation of “person aggrieved” under section 273 of the BVI Insolvency Act, which deals with standing to challenge a liquidator’s decision.

The High Court sanctioned Madagascar Oil Limited’s restructuring plan, exercising cross class cram down. The judgment deals with a few now familiar points: what is the relevant alternative? Can it be a different deal? As well as touching on a few novel ones in an unusual two class only plan: was there in fact an in the money class enabling cross class cram down? Almost a third of the judgment is devoted to international recognition and effectiveness of the plan in Madagascar and Mauritius, an unusually detailed analysis, but required here given the specific facts of the case.

In a significant further application of the Court of Appeal’s reasoning in Adler, Thames Water and Petrofac, the High Court declined to sanction a cross-class cram down restructuring plan proposed by Waldorf Production UK Plc.

In a difficult economic climate, commercial landlords may fear that tenant insolvencies mean no one will foot the bill for dilapidations claims at lease expiry – but they are not without recourse.

Nicola Sharp looks at the reasons why the court granted a £5m WFO against directors of a company in liquidation.

The High Court has granted a Worldwide Freezing Order to the value of over £5 million against directors of a company in liquidation, who are also husband and wife.

The couple, Sameer Rizvi and Iryna Dubylovska were the only acting directors and shareholders of the company.

Underlying claim for misfeasance

In Vesnin v Queeld Ventures Ltd & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 951, the English Court of Appeal has ruled that in an application for recognition at common law of a foreign insolvency, a respondent to that application may have standing to oppose the recognition even if they are not a creditor. The fact that other relief is sought against them, which is contingent on recognition of the foreign insolvency, can and usually will suffice to give them standing to oppose the recognition.

Background