Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
Poxon and another v Wejo Ltd (in administration) [2025] EWHC 135 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? As noted by His Honour Judge Cawson KC at paragraph 7 of his judgment, the case raises what appears to be an open point: when the court is invited to set the basis of an office-holder’s remuneration by reference to the time properly spent by the office-holder and their staff on matters arising in the administration under IR 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 18.16(2)(b), should it also examine the quantum of the administrator’s fee estimate provided to creditors pursuant to IR 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 18.16(4)(a)? The judgment therefore addresses whether scrutiny of that estimate forms part of the exercise. In this case, the court concluded that the evidence placed before it by the joint administrators was inadequate. It was not...
In this issue: Key R& I law developments Insolvency litigation Restructuring Personal insolvency International restructuring and insolvency Directors and insolvency R& I in Scotland Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New Practice Notes New Q& A Key R& I law developments Insolvency Service publishes monthly insolvency statistics for January 2025 The Insolvency Service has released its January 2025 monthly figures covering corporate and personal insolvencies across England and Wales. The figures show 1,971 corporate insolvencies—up 6% on December 2024 and 11% above January 2024, indicating a continued year-on-year rise. For individuals, there were 9,706 insolvencies in January 2025, which is 3% down on December 2024 yet 12% higher than the same month in 2024, reflecting a mixed month-on-month picture. See: LNB News 18/02/2025 47......
Background This appeal turns on the interpretation of IA 1986, s 423, a provision that safeguards creditors by offering remedies where a debtor has acted to defeat or prejudice their claims by entering a transaction for which the debtor receives no consideration (i.e. no payment or other value) or consideration worth less than what the debtor provides. Such arrangements are often fashioned to make a debtor ‘judgment-proof’. The respondent, Invest Bank PSC ( Invest Bank), had obtained an Abu Dhabi judgment against the appellants’ father, Mr El- Husseini, for roughly £20m. Invest Bank identified valuable assets in the UK for enforcement, including houses in central London or companies that owned such properties. It alleged that Mr El- Husseini caused those assets to be transferred to others so as to place them beyond Invest Bank’s reach, or to reduce the value of the...
Re Farfetch Ltd (in liquidation) [2024] EWHC 3340 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling sets out pragmatic points for insolvency practitioners. JOLS should employ a phased method to gathering information, with the court entertaining applications only where initial steps are inadequate. Written questions ought to be tried and exhausted before any oral examination, and a clear explanation is required for why written answers alone would not be adequate. The court articulated a workable scheme to address confidentiality, including requiring liquidation committee members to give formal acknowledgements of their confidentiality duties. In cross‑border situations, jurisdiction must be determined before liquidators seek orders against individuals living abroad. Resolving jurisdiction early is crucial before advancing substantive applications. Practitioners must provide cogent evidence of possession when seeking document production orders. Courts may adopt a practical stance by preserving potentially relevant...
Mobile Telecommunications Co KSCP, which trades as Zain Group Mobile Telecommunications Co KSCP, trading as Zain Group, has challenged a decision that the English courts lacked authority to serve a bankruptcy petition on Prince Hussam bin Saud bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. Bankruptcy legislation requires an individual to have a ‘place of residence’ in England before jurisdiction is engaged. The prince convinced the High Court that he had no residence in the UK, but the telecoms company asked the Court of Appeal to set that conclusion aside. Stephen Moverley Smith KC of XXIV Old Buildings, for Mobile Telecommunications, told the Court of Appeal that Parliament intended the gateway to bankruptcy jurisdiction to be broad—and that the court should give effect to that intention. ‘ Parliament’s intention was to provide a wide basis for the court to assume jurisdiction’, he said. Moverley Smith further argued that to...
AFP Assets Ltd v Hugill and others [2025] EWHC 256 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment is a timely reminder for practitioners across diverse fields of the principle in Reinwood Ltd v L Brown & Sons Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1090: a party bringing a contract to an end may later uphold that step by relying on facts that existed at the time but were not articulated in the termination notice. In this case, those matters were known to the parties when the notice was given, although that is not a prerequisite; frequently they are not known then, hence their omission. As such, the point can be a potent tool for a terminating party facing a challenge to its notice, and it is certainly something advisers to recipients should keep in mind. It therefore pays both those issuing and those...
Thomas and others v PJSC National Bank Trust [2025] EWHC 75 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Insolvency office-holders ought to assess if payments to creditors could be barred by sanctions laws (here, those relating to Russia). Such regimes can impact individuals or entities not directly designated where a sanctioned person owns or controls them. Carve-outs can exist; as in this matter, distributions were allowed because the duty to pay crystallised prior to the sanctions framework taking effect. Accordingly, even where a creditor is not named, ownership or control by a designated person can trigger the rules. Timing of the obligation to pay may therefore determine permissibility. What was the background? After NBT collapsed in 2014, it sued Nikolay Fetisov and Ilya Yurov (‘the Bankrupts’). When judgment was handed down, they were required to pay NBT roughly US$900m, prompting bankruptcy...
In this issue: Key R& I law developments Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Restructuring Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation International restructuring and insolvency R& I in Scotland Daily and weekly news alerts Corporate Rescue and Insolvency ( February 2025) Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals Key R& I law developments Insolvency Service releases January 2025 enforcement outcomes management information The Insolvency Service has refreshed its management information on enforcement outcomes for January 2025. The figures indicate 88 disqualifications of directors and 13 restrictions relating to bankruptcy and debt relief. See: LNB News 11/02/2025 6. Insolvency Practitioners ( Recognised Professional Bodies) ( Revocation of Recognition) Order ( Northern Ireland) 2025 SR 2025/19 This Order revises the Insolvency Practitioners ( Recognised Professional Bodies) Order ( Northern Ireland) 1991, SR 1991/301, by excluding the Institute of Chartered...
Mobile Telecommunications Company KSCP v HRH Prince Hussam [2025] EWHC 85 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This dispute examined the jurisdictional bases available for a creditor’s bankruptcy petition under the Insolvency Act 1986, and in particular those contained in section 265 of that Act. The initial limb, concerning the debtor’s centre of main interests, was not applicable in this instance. Attention therefore shifted to the second limb in section 265: whether, during the three years leading up to the petition date (the relevant period), the debtor maintained a place of residence within the jurisdiction. Drawing together various and disparate strands from earlier authorities, the court expressly set out at [148] a clear and authoritative five-part framework that defines the quality and degree of occupation required to found jurisdiction in this context: first, the...
Corporate Rescue and Insolvency The newest edition of Corporate Rescue and Insolvency ( February 2025) is now accessible on Lexis +® UK (subscription required). This issue features the following articles: Safe as houses: modified universalism plays second fiddle to the immovables rule—(2025) 1 CRI 3 by Helen Coverdale of Norton Rose Fulbright LLP Part 26A restructuring plans: litigation lessons from Re Chaptre Finance pic [2024] EWHC 2908 ( Ch)—(2025) 1 CRI 5 178 by Yazmin Meadows of Pinsent Masons LLP Assigning insolvency......
In this issue: Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Restructuring Directors and insolvency The office-holder R& I in Scotland Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New content Corporate insolvency processes Public law defences in winding up petitions under section 85 of the Finance Act 2022 ( Re Purity Ltd) HMRC issued a public interest winding up petition under section 85 of the Finance Act 2022 ( FA 2022), which was listed for trial. After the petition was presented, the company commenced judicial review proceedings contesting HMRC’s decision to petition, and then sought a stay of the winding up case. Its position was that public law defences could not be aired at the petition trial, as such arguments were for the Administrative Court alone. The court decided that FA 2022, s 85 petitions should be...
Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights—30 January 2025 In this issue: Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Restructuring Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation The office-holder International restructuring and insolvency Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New Practice Notes Corporate insolvency processes Disputed petitions— How far does the insolvency courts’ jurisdiction extend? ( Advanced Security Alarm Protection Ltd v UK Protection Ltd) The feature case, Advanced Security Alarm Protection Ltd v UK Protection Ltd, addresses a winding-up petition issued in the Insolvency and Companies Court ( ICC) alongside a contemporaneous application to strike it out on the basis that the petition debt is disputed. It explores the threshold for a successful challenge where liability is contested. In doing so, it offers guidance on: (i) the principles the ICC should apply when...
Practice Notes Please refer to the Part 26A restructuring plan deal debrief for Thames Water Utilities Holdings Ltd, and the Part 26A restructuring plan deal debrief— Re Speciality Steel UK Ltd. For further details on RPs submitted in 2023 and anticipated developments, see Practice Note: Market Insights Trend Report—trends in Part 26A restructuring plans in 2023. For a concise primer on restructuring plans, consult: Restructuring plan—overview......
Re Wealthtek LLP (in special administration) [2024] EWHC 3050 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling emphasises the need to: distinguish an appointment as administrators of a trustee tasked with administering trust property from being appointed as administrators of an insolvent company to deal with the company’s own assets, and accurately identifying for the court the applicable regulatory regime The first question had to be assessed against the objectives of special administration set out in the Investment Bank Special Administration ( England and Wales) Rules 2011 ( IBSA) SI 2011/1301, in particular Objective 1: the return of client assets as soon as reasonably practicable. That statutory aim framed how the court approached the Administrators’ mandate. Because the Administrators’ function fell within category (i) above, and all clients were adults, the bank held the assets on bare trust; the right to...
Removal of liquidator by the court Consult the Practice Note titled Removal of liquidator by the court. For a broad outline of removing and replacing the office-holder, refer to Removal and replacement of the office-holder—overview......
Advanced Security Alarm Protection Ltd v UK Protection Ltd (transcript) [2024] EWHC 3111 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision underscores the evidential onus on any party presenting a winding‑up petition where the asserted debt is in dispute. It is a clear warning that the insolvency regime is not a shortcut where there is a live controversy about liability. Overlooking a genuine dispute, and failing to address it properly, risks the petition being struck out and the petitioner facing adverse costs consequences. Where the dispute underlying the petition has a real prospect of success, the correct course is to pursue recovery through civil litigation in the ordinary courts rather than via insolvency processes. Petitioners should assess and evidence the nature of the dispute before turning to the insolvency jurisdiction. Advisers to prospective...
What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment underscores the English court’s capacity to deliver adaptable relief suited to disputes with an international dimension, reflecting a flexible, context‑sensitive approach. The court approved the approach in Schemmer v Property Resources Ltd [1975] 1 Ch 273, setting out how the English courts should evaluate whether an overseas receiver’s appointment is to be recognised in this forum. In Schemmer, the court stated that it must first be satisfied that there exists a sufficient connection between the company and the jurisdiction in which the foreign receiver was appointed. Applying that yardstick here, and as in Schemmer v Property, the required connection was not present, and accordingly recognition could not be afforded on these facts by the court here......
Main v Spadental Ltd and another [2024] EAT 200 What are the practical implications of this case? The decision will interest practitioners working in insolvency and employment. On the vesting of claims, it confirms the broad scope of section 436 of the Insolvency Act 1986 regarding what counts as property. A chose in action can pass to a trustee in bankruptcy even where, at that point or in those circumstances, the bankrupt is not yet able to enforce it. The EAT also indicated that the nature of the remedy pursued is pivotal in deciding whether a claim is personal or proprietary, and that the legislative policy aims behind the cause of action carry less weight than the character of the remedy itself. Trustees of bankrupt estates will be reassured that employment claims where the cause of action includes at least a failure to pay wages, and where the...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
