Key points
- Court does not have jurisdiction to direct detailed assessment of fees agreed by administrators on application of liquidator
- Administrators can agree solicitors’ fees for work carried out during the administration after they cease holding office
- The court has no inherent jurisdiction to direct a detailed assessment
The facts
Key points
- There have been conflicting decisions on whether a person may be made the subject of any income payments order (IPO)
- This case suggests that the court will not make an IPO in respect of unelected pension entitlements
The facts
The facts
Facts
The respondents applied to set aside an order permitting the liquidators to serve the ‘Main Application’ on the respondents out of the jurisdiction (‘Set Aside Application’). Grounds of the application were: (i) the liquidators could not establish a serious issue to be tried/ reasonable prospect of success on the Main Application; and (ii) the initial without notice application had been procured by misrepresentation and/or material non-disclosure.
This article originally appeared on LexisNexus.com
Produced in partnership with Susan Kelly, Caroline Castle and Ben Holland of Squire Patton Boggs.
Introduction to Common Participants in the Market
The oil and gas industry is a significant contributor to the UK economy:
References:
House of Commons Library Briefing Paper: UK offshore oil and gas industry 22 March 2016
Summary: Customers of a company in administration were entitled, as against a factor, to exercise equitable set-off in respect of entitlements to rebates that had arisen between the customers and the company notwithstanding the assignment of the customer’s debts to the factor.
Bibby Factors Northwest Ltd v HFD Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1908 (17 December 2015)
Background
In Brief
On 1 August 2016, six years after it received Royal Assent, the UK Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (the "2010 Act") will finally come into force. It is expected to provide an effective mechanism for third-party claimants to seek recovery directly from an insolvent defendant's liability insurers.
* * *
The Commercial Court recently held that the Defendant, a former majority beneficial owner of the Claimant bank, had acted dishonestly and in breach of duties owed to the Claimant in causing the Claimant to advance monies in eight transactions which had not been repaid or recovered, to a borrower closely connected to the Defendant
Background
After a delay of almost 6 years, it has now been confirmed that The Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 will come into force on 1 August 2016.
First published in the International Arbitration 1/3LY, Issue 7
Insolvency law contains summary processes for dealing with claims and protections against certain proceedings commencing or continuing. There has been some debate, and recent case law, concerning the primacy of these rules over agreements to arbitrate. In the following article, we look at what the current position is under English law and beyond.
General position under English law