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
    Removal of insolvency officeholders: what is a good and sufficient cause?
    2010-12-17

    The administrators of St George’s Property Services (London) Ltd appealed from a decision granting the application of the 2 shareholders and directors of the company to remove the administrators and to appoint replacement insolvency practitioners who were willing to make an application under s 244 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (UK) in respect of an exorbitant credit transaction to which the company was a party.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Buddle Findlay, Shareholder, Credit (finance), Insolvency Act 1986 (UK)
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Buddle Findlay
    Lehman/Nortel judgment: pension scheme is “supercreditor”
    2010-12-21

    The High Court has decided that financial support directions can be issued against insolvent companies as well as solvent ones.

    The administrators of 20 insolvent companies in the Lehman Brothers and Nortel groups had argued that the Pensions Regulator’s Determinations Panel had no legal power to determine that it would be reasonable to issue FSDs against these companies. The High Court disagreed and decided:

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Employee Benefits & Pensions, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nabarro LLP, Unsecured debt, Statutory interpretation, The Pensions Regulator (UK), Lehman Brothers
    Authors:
    Ian Greenstreet
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Nabarro LLP
    Filing for administration - get it right or else!
    2010-12-22

    Since 2003, the procedure for appointing administrators has largely consisted of filing simple forms with a court. What could be easier? A recent case has, however, highlighted the dangers of making errors in the filing process and serves as a timely warning to everyone involved in insolvency and security enforcement work.

    In Kaupthing Capital Partners II Master LP Inc, the English courts ruled that an appointment of administrators was invalid as the incorrect form had been used for the appointment.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, MacRoberts LLP, Legal personality, Debt, Limited partnership, Novartis v. Union of India & Others
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    MacRoberts LLP
    Adjudication enforcement and insolvency
    2010-12-22

    A late-October 2010 case on adjudication illustrates the courts' approach to technical and insolvency-based challenges regarding enforcement of adjudicators' awards.

    Haymills (Contractors) Ltd went into administration in August 2009 having already won one adjudication against its employer, Shaftsbury, and having just commenced another, which it subsequently also won. Given Haymills' administration, Shaftsbury refused to pay the amounts awarded in either adjudication, relying on numerous heads to resist payment:  

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mills & Reeve LLP, Breach of contract, Capital punishment, Stay of execution
    Authors:
    Paul Slinger
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Mills & Reeve LLP
    Environmental issues in corporate insolvency
    2010-12-23

    The implications of taking an appointment over an insolvent business which is regulated by environmental law can be far reaching. Environmental regulation has become more stringent and the sanctions for breach can leave the IP exposed to liability, including (amongst other things) costs sanctions.

    The main environmental regimes referred to in this update are the contaminated land and water pollution regimes.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Environment & Climate Change, Insolvency & Restructuring, BDB Pitmans LLP, Contamination, Environmental remediation, Pollution, Consideration, Due diligence, Water pollution, Environmental Protection Act 1990 (UK)
    Authors:
    Suzanne Brooker , Adrian Wilmot
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    BDB Pitmans LLP
    Circumstances in which the court may approve fees without the requirement for the appointment of a court reporter
    2010-11-02

    Introduction

    Against the backdrop of the recent sheriff court decisions regarding the need to appoint a Court Reporter even in cases where the assets are insufficient to meet the IPs' fees, the Court of Session has taken an innovative approach to approving IP fees without the need to appoint a court reporter.

    Background

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Scotland, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP, Costs in English law, Security (finance), Interest, Accounting, Liquidation, Court costs, Secured creditor, Liquidator (law), Court of Session
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP
    Appeal of UK case on effect of events of default on netting and payment obligations dismissed on consent
    2010-11-05

    If you were waiting to hear what the English Court of Appeal had to say about the lower court decision in Marine Trade S.A. v. Pioneer Freight Futures Co. Ltd. you’ll be disappointed, as the appeal was dismissed by consent of the parties on October 22, 2010.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Shipping & Transport, Stikeman Elliott LLP, Bankruptcy, Debt, Unjust enrichment, Common law, Default (finance), Contract for difference, International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Insolvency Act 1986 (UK), Court of Appeal of England & Wales, High Court of Justice (England & Wales)
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Stikeman Elliott LLP
    Insolvency figures paint contrasting picture
    2010-11-05

    A leading South Yorkshire insolvency expert has warned of a risk of a rise in corporate insolvencies in the new year.  

    The Government Insolvency Service third quarter figures show a slight decline in all forms of corporate insolvency and a big decline in the number of administrations (down 35 per cent on this time last year and 19 per cent down from the previous quarter).  

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Kennedys Law LLP, Bankruptcy, Solicitor, Dispute resolution, Consumer debt, Stakeholder (corporate), Self-employment, HM Revenue and Customs (UK)
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Kennedys Law LLP
    Landlord victory as CVA fails to release guarantee
    2010-11-05

    The High Court has struck down a company voluntary arrangement on the ground that it unfairly prejudiced a landlord who was to lose the benefit of a guarantee given by the tenant’s parent company. The judge said it was “unreasonable and unfair in principle” to require the landlord to give up the guarantee and there was “no sufficient justification” for requiring the landlord to accept a sum of money in lieu.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Real Estate, Dechert LLP, Retail, Surety, Landlord, Leasehold estate, Electricity, Liquidation, Prejudice, Parent company, Trustee, High Court of Justice (England & Wales)
    Authors:
    David Gervais
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Dechert LLP
    Non-disclosure of corporate re-organisation and breach of warranty (again)
    2010-11-10

    By a judgment handed down on 26 October 2010 in Sugar Hut Group Ltd & Ors v Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) Plc & Ors [2010] EWHC 2636 (Comm), Mr Justice Burton in the Commercial Court held that insurers were entitled to avoid, for a material non-disclosure of a corporate re-organisation, a policy which could otherwise have covered losses arising from a fire at the premises of the insureds.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Herbert Smith Freehills LLP, Shareholder, Breach of contract, Reinsurance, Public limited company, Non-disclosure agreement, Warranty, Underwriting, Subsidiary, AXA, High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Commercial Court (England and Wales)
    Authors:
    Alexander Oddy , Greig Anderson
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Herbert Smith Freehills LLP

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 412
    • Page 413
    • Page 414
    • Page 415
    • Current page 416
    • Page 417
    • Page 418
    • Page 419
    • Page 420
    • …
    • 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