Transaction defrauding creditors meaning

This Flowchart sets out the requirements for a transaction defrauding creditors. This flow chart explains the requirements for a transaction defrauding creditors...

In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Transferring property Property insolvency Property taxes Easements, rights and covenants Property in Scotland Leasing property LexTalk®Property: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional property updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New Q&As Key developments and horizon scanning Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LFRA 2024), which gained Royal Assent on 24 May 2024 and featured in last week’s highlights, has now been published. Sections 113 (controls on remedies for arrears of rent charges), 117 (recovery of legal costs etc through service charge), 118 (repeal of section 125 of the Building Safety Act 2022) and 119 (higher-risk and relevant buildings: insolvency notifications) take effect two months after Royal Assent (24 July 2024). The rest of LFRA 2024 will commence by regulations to be made by the new government after the election. See: LNB News 04/06/2024 14. ...

Purkiss (as liquidator of Ethos Solutions Ltd) v Kennedy and others [2024] EWHC 1081 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment clarifies the scope of IA 1986, s 423 and confirms that tax avoidance, standing alone, is not an unlawful purpose. The respondents received monies they should not have obtained by joining a failed tax avoidance arrangement; yet, without additional evidence, IA 1986, s 423 was not the appropriate avenue to recover those sums What was the background? The Company was an umbrella enterprise established in 2008 that promoted and operated a tax avoidance scheme (the Scheme) intended to enable self‑employed participants to avoid paying income tax and national insurance contributions (NICs) on their earnings. Under the Scheme, individuals who had supplied services to an end user as consultants or independent contractors became employees of the Company and then delivered their services to the end user through the Company. Most of their remuneration was routed by the Company to an offshore employee...

In this issue: Court of Protection UK taxes for Private Client HMRC Manuals updates Budgets and Finance Bills Insolvency—Private Client Contentious trusts and estates Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland International Question of the week Additional Private Client updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®Private Client: a Lexis®PSL community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q&As Useful information Court of Protection Court of Protection approves indefinite extension of injunction against P’s son in order to protect and support best interest decisions made for P (MK (‘P’), In the Matter of) This matter relates to MK, an 81-year-old woman with vascular dementia. To safeguard court-ordered best interests decisions concerning MK’s living arrangements and care, the court continued, on an open-ended basis, an injunction limiting her son’s contact and preventing him from independently arranging medical assessments. The court determined it holds jurisdiction, under...

A limited company can repurchase its own shares provided it satisfies specific conditions in the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). This activity is described as a share buyback, or a purchase of own shares. Alongside CA 2006, additional rules and guidance apply to any listed or AIM company intending to acquire its shares. The CA 2006 constraints on buybacks do not extend to unlimited companies. For more detail on that company type, see Practice Note: Unlimited companies. For an outline of the steps to implement a buyback, see Practice Note: How to carry out a share buyback. For an overview of the legal framework and typical motivations for a buyback, see Practice Note: Share buybacks—the legal framework. Off-market or on-market? Only one form of buyback is available to a private limited company: it may conduct an off-market purchase of shares. Consequently, this Practice Note does not address on-market (market) purchases of shares...

This glossary sets out numerous expressions regularly encountered in the restructuring & insolvency sphere. Words shown in bold within definitions are themselves explained in other entries in this glossary as well. A Article X The MLIJ contains a single provision named Article X, aimed at jurisdictions that have already implemented the MLCBI, like England, or are weighing its adoption. Article X states: ‘Not withstanding any prior interpretation to the contrary, the relief available under [insert a cross-reference to the legislation of this State enacting Article 21 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency] includes recognition and enforcement of a judgment’ (see Practice Note: UNCITRAL model law on recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments (MLIJ): Article X). Asset-backed security (ABS) A form of security anchored by asset pools, for example loans, leases, and credit card receivables. Assimilated law From 1 January 2024, ‘retained law’ has been retitled ‘assimilated law’. The body of domestic law originally arising from EU obligations, created by the European...

Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) Section 423 provides a route to set aside dealings engineered to prejudice creditors. The regime is aimed at stopping parties from shifting assets in a manner that thwarts creditor claims. Put shortly, it targets arrangements by which assets are moved so creditors are kept at bay. A claimant may proceed under IA 1986, s 423 against a company or an individual following a transaction at an undervalue (TUV) executed with the intention of placing assets out of creditors’ reach. Though there are parallels with a TUV under IA 1986, s 238 (for corporate insolvency) and IA 1986, s 339 (for personal insolvency), the following distinctions are central: Relief under IA 1986, s 423 does not necessarily have to be connected to any formal insolvency proceedings Under IA 1986, s 423 the transaction’s purpose is decisive, whereas under IA 1986, ss 238 and 339 the purpose is not a relevant criterion IA 1986, s 423 requires...