“I'm able to do more in the day, which means I'm providing more value to my clients - and it's helped my margins in terms of how much I can bill. LexisNexis is helping me make money.”
ParrisWhittakerAccess all documents on Debt relief order
Martin v McLaren Construction Ltd and McLaren Construction Ltd v Martin Dawn Plc [2025] EWHC 406 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision confirms that a debtor cannot fend off winding-up or bankruptcy petitions merely by disputing the sum claimed or pointing to set-offs or counterclaims exceeding the petition debt, in order to resist such relief. The court will interrogate the parties’ material in depth, weighing what is produced on both sides, and will apply an approach comparable to that used on a summary judgment application when assessing whether there is a real defence. While recognising that conspiracies are typically concealed and often difficult to evidence directly, a litigant advancing such an allegation must still produce some evidential foundation for it, particularly where the contention is not inherently convincing or appears improbable on its face. The ruling underlines that English courts are hesitant to imply terms into negotiated bargains, especially where the agreement operates perfectly sensibly without the addition and...
Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights—11 July 2024 In this issue: Key R&I law developments Sanctions Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Restructuring Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation Daily and weekly news alerts New content Key R&I law developments Insolvency Service publishes June 2024 enforcement outcomes management information The Insolvency Service has refreshed its enforcement outcomes management information tables to include June 2024 data. The figures indicate 90 director disqualifications and 12 bankruptcy and debt relief restrictions arising from its enforcement activity. See: LNB News 09/07/2024 48. Sanctions Judgment Alert: Hellard v OJSC Rossiysky Kredit Bank (in liquidation) [2024] EWHC 1783 (Ch) The judgment in this matter has now been handed down. See: LNB News 10/07/2024 56. Corporate insolvency processes Petitions based on unrecognised/unregistered foreign judgment debts (Re a Company) The High Court has lately addressed two key questions concerning a winding-up petition anchored on foreign judgment debts that...
Insolvency, revenue law, and civil procedure (The Commissioners for HMRC v Payroll & Pension Services (PPS Umbrella Company) Ltd) Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Payroll & Pension Services (PPS Umbrella Company) Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 995 What are the practical implications of this case? Before this ruling, first-instance decisions had split along two paths: one held that HMRC was discharging a public interest or law-enforcement role and so need not provide any cross-undertaking in damages; the other treated HMRC, for these purposes, as no different from a creditor enforcing a debt, requiring a cross-undertaking as the price of the order. The Court of Appeal confirmed the latter strand is right. Because appointing provisional liquidators can have a catastrophic impact on a company’s business, if such relief is wrongly obtained the company now has at least some assurance that it may pursue the undertaking. Accordingly, HMRC must proffer a cross-undertaking when seeking the order. This provides a measure of protection where the appointment proves unwarranted. What was the...
What is marshalling? In Re Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (No 8) (at [231]–[232]), Lord Hoffman characterised marshalling as an equitable device for resolving competing claims between two or more creditors of the same debtor. Where one creditor can resort to more than one security or fund, and another has access to only a single security, the latter gains an equity to insist that the former looks, as far as practicable, to the security or fund that is not available to the latter, or is treated as having done so... By way of illustration, suppose C1 and C2 are each owed £1m by a common debtor, D. To secure C1’s £1m, D grants C1 charges over two assets—Blackacre and Whiteacre—each worth £1m. C2’s protection, however, is limited to a charge over Whiteacre alone. If C1 satisfies its claim out of Blackacre, C2 can then take the benefit of its charge over Whiteacre...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE : The Renters’ Rights Act 2025 received Royal Assent on 27 October 2025. For guidance on the Act’s impact on residential tenancies in England, see Practice Note: Renters' Rights Act 2025—key provisions. This Practice Note outlines the options available to landlords and tenants for bringing an assured tenancy (AT) or an assured shorthold tenancy (AST) in England to an end. It concentrates on the landlord routes under sections 8 and 21 of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988), including the requirements for serving a notice seeking possession and the need to evidence any grounds relied upon. The pre-conditions for a section 21 notice include: Providing a gas safety certificate Supplying an Energy Performance Certificate Giving the How to Rent document Complying with a Tenancy Deposit Scheme It also addresses the court process for possession—varying according to whether section 8 or section 21 is used—and the steps to enforce a possession order where required. For material on granting...
This Practice Note outlines the function of the official receiver (OR) in personal insolvency. Appointment of ORs An OR is a statutory office-holder. In relation to any bankruptcy, individual voluntary arrangement (IVA), debt relief order, or any application for such an order, the OR is any person who, by virtue of sections 399 or 401 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), is authorised to act as OR in respect of that bankruptcy, IVA, debt relief order, or application. The Secretary of State may, with the Treasury’s approval as to numbers, appoint persons to the office of OR. Anyone appointed will be attached to either the High Court or the County Court. Subject to any directions issued by the Secretary of State, an OR assigned to a particular court is the person authorised to act as OR for every bankruptcy, IVA, debt relief order, or application for such an order within that court’s jurisdiction. Accordingly, the attached OR is the designated official for all such matters before that...
[(1) A person in respect of whom a debt relief order is made is guilty of an offence if during the relevant period he disposed of any property which he had obtained on credit and, at the time he disposed of it, had not paid for it.(2) Any other person is guilty of an offence if during the relevant period he acquired or received property from a person in respect of whom a debt relief order was made (the “debtor”) knowing or believing—(a) that the debtor owed money in respect