Insolvency applicants: getting the basics right
A number of interesting developments have emerged from what was quite a run-of-the-mill insolvency application brought by a litigation funder assignee.
A number of interesting developments have emerged from what was quite a run-of-the-mill insolvency application brought by a litigation funder assignee ().
Firstly, a claim seeking a remedy pursuant to section 423 IA86 (transaction defrauding creditors) is not an insolvency proceeding. Only applications made under Parts I to XI can be brought by insolvency application. Despite the trend to include section 423 in insolvency applications, Chief Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Briggs reluctantly concluded that there is no established practice that can be relied upon to override the rules governing how proceedings should be commenced.
Secondly, the assignee had no standing to make a claim pursuant to section 212(3) IA86 (misfeasance). It was not a creditor or contributory and the office of liquidator cannot be assigned or sold.
In both cases, a Part 7 claim should have been made and the issue fee paid. In this case, the proceedings were allowed to continue subject to a condition requiring the applicant to pay the prevailing Part 7 claim court fee.
As a result of this judgment, an office-holder and assignee of claims will be forced to issue claims arising from an insolvency using different procedures, in different lists within the Business and Property Courts, with the risk that without a transfer they will be case managed, at least, by different judges although the claims arise out of the same facts. Whilst this outcome was reached with regret, it represents strict adherence to the rules which future applicants will be expected to follow. Perhaps there is some hope that, having identified these shortcomings, the rules will be amended to streamline these processes.
Related expertise
You may be interested in...
Published Article
Johnson et al v FirstRand Bank: Judgment sends warning across financial services intermediation
澳门六合彩资料
Manchester Ship Canal Co Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd: Opening the floodgates to mass litigation?
澳门六合彩资料
Know your dispute resolution clauses: Key take-aways from Kajima v Children鈥檚 Ark and Lancashire Schools v Lendlease
Opinion
Law Commission initial consultation published on reforming Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954
Press Release
澳门六合彩资料 advises retail giant The Range on its acquisition of Homebase
澳门六合彩资料
New amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules and their impact
澳门六合彩资料
Is Companies House turning the tide against facilitators of fraud?
澳门六合彩资料 - Procurement Act
Modification of contracts existing before the go-live date of the Procurement Act 2023
澳门六合彩资料 - Procurement Act
Decisions of the Independent Patient Choice and Procurement Panel
Opinion
Publication of The Renters鈥 Rights Bill: Major changes to the private rented sector are on their way
澳门六合彩资料
Motor finance complaints on hold: Why now is the time for strategic action
澳门六合彩资料 - Procurement Act
Contract management and performance
澳门六合彩资料
Extended s20 voluntary care isn鈥檛 always a breach of human rights
澳门六合彩资料
Alternative dispute resolution: The future of ADR in the UK legal system
Opinion
Settling future claims: Insights from Clifford v IBM 2024
Press Release
澳门六合彩资料 strengthens Irish Corporate team with appointment of Principal Associate James Byrne
澳门六合彩资料 - PFI expiry
A first of many? PFI company seeks Restructuring Plan
Opinion - Maternity services
New online system streamlines maternity services at The University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust
澳门六合彩资料 - Building Safety Act
Case update: Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Homes and Communities v Grey GR Limited Partnership
澳门六合彩资料
Commercial contracts: Top tips before signing on the dotted line
On-Demand - Shared Insights
Duty of Candour review: Submission to the Department of Health and Social Care
Published Article
English Commercial Court rules against Russian exclusive jurisdiction clauses
澳门六合彩资料
Changes to the fixed recoverable costs regime
Opinion
R (Willmott) v Eastbourne Council: High Court rules council can deny social housing to disabled ex-tenant over anti-social behaviour
Press Release
澳门六合彩资料 Ireland LLP rank across Dispute Resolution, Intellectual Property and Technology in the Legal 500 EMEA 2024
澳门六合彩资料
Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil Council: A game changing decision for local authorities
澳门六合彩资料
Restrictive covenants 鈥 look before you leap!
澳门六合彩资料
Court of Appeal decision again demonstrates the need for reform of the Solicitors Minimum Terms
澳门六合彩资料
The impact of insolvencies on construction in 2024
Press Release
Landmark Supreme Court decision clarifies the extent of Doctors鈥 Duty of Care
澳门六合彩资料
Proposed amendments to the Arbitration Act 1996
澳门六合彩资料
The downfall of Vesttoo: Fraudulent letters of credit
澳门六合彩资料
Are amendments to be expected for the Arbitration Act 1996?
澳门六合彩资料
The commercial realities of disputes and litigation
澳门六合彩资料
The Supreme Court considers limitation in environmental nuisance claims
Opinion
Vicarious liability of amateur sports teams for player on player injuries
Press Release
Three strong restructuring and insolvency team join 澳门六合彩资料
澳门六合彩资料
Part 36 combined offers 鈥 when are they beaten?
Press Release
澳门六合彩资料鈥檚 patent litigation team praised for being 鈥渄ynamic鈥 and a 鈥渕ajor player鈥 in IAM Patent 1000 guide
