The recent TCC decision in Brit Inns Ltd (in liquidation) v. BDW Trading Ltd (Costs) [2012] EWHC 2489 (TCC) is a useful summary of the costs principles that will be applied where Claimants pursue inflated claims – either deliberately or through lack of sufficient care. The relevant principles will be:
In Rubin v Eurofinance SA [2012] UKSC 46, the Supreme Court (by a majority of 4 to 1) reversed the Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision and held that the English court would not enforce a judgment made by the New York court in insolvency proceedings to which the defendant did not submit.
Government’s plan to boost UK house building
Recently the Prime Minister announced a new housing and planning package that is intended to stimulate:
In our last issue, we looked at the implications for out-of-court administrations where the company or directors seek to appoint an administrator under paragraph 22 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986, but then discover that between filing their notice of intention to appoint and their notice of appointment, a winding-up petition has been presented, triggering paragraph 25 of the Schedule. Paragraph 25 prevents the appointment of an administrator under paragraph 22 where there is a pending winding-up petition.
Notice of assignment
Notice of assignment can be given by either the assignee or assignor under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA).
This was the High Court's finding in Smith v 1st Credit (Finance) Ltd and another. Smith was notified by her credit card company that her credit card debt had been assigned to 1st Credit. 1st Credit wrote to Smith shortly afterwards confirming the assignment and advising how payment could be made. Smith failed to pay and was made bankrupt by 1st Credit which subsequently repossessed and sold Smith's property.
Several industry associations (ISDA, BBA and FOA – the futures and options association) have responded to a Treasury informal consultation on the need to carve out from English insolvency law the porting of clearing clients’ positions and margin. They agree on the need to ensure certainty around the porting option when a clearing member becomes insolvent. EMIR’s porting option should also apply where the clearing member is acting through back-to-back transactions and holds the client’s margin. The associations note that porting should be subject to agreement.
FSA has launched a consultation and discussion paper on proposals to bring the Client Assets Sourcebook (CASS) in line with EMIR. More generally, it wants to make CASS client money pooling provisions more flexible and address the problems identified during the Lehman and MF Global insolvencies.
The proposals cover the following:
The ongoing global financial crisis has resulted in a number of debt restructuring transactions as a result of companies being unable to meet with their debt obligations. In distressed situations, issuers typically seek investor consent to amend existing terms and conditions, often to relax covenants, reschedule payments, limit events of default and remove restrictions on raising further capital.
This update highlights developments in the administration of MF Global UK (“MFG”) since our last alert dated 15 June 2012.
Estimated outcomes
When a business is on the receiving end of a claim, it is faced with the prospect of having to incur significant costs to defend the action.
A defendant in that situation will usually be protected by the general rule that 'the loser pays the winner's costs'.
This means that if the defendant successfully defends the claim, the defendant can expect to recover a percentage of its costs from the claimant as ordered by the court if not agreed.
But what if happens if the claimant is unable to pay the defendant's costs?