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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Mayfair Capital Residential 2 LLP v Reim Katch Securities Ltd [2024] EWHC 1920 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? In Mayfair Capital, the court concluded that an intercreditor deed permitted ongoing ‘permitted payments’ to the junior lender, notwithstanding the appointment of a receiver. The application of proceeds clause, which directs amounts received by the lenders to be applied first in discharge of the senior debt and then the junior debt, was held, by necessary implication, to operate subject to the permitted payments provision. Accordingly, the permitted payments regime prevailed over that clause to this extent. The decision is a helpful reminder to practitioners to ensure intercreditor agreements and deeds of priority contain express payment stops (where this is commercially agreed). Further, where the parties intend the way in which proceeds are applied to differ before and after...
Brown v Ulrick (as the liquidator of S. A. L. Holdings Ltd) S. A. L. Holdings Ltd (in members’ voluntary liquidation) [2024] EWHC 2041 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling highlights three key themes that merit special attention: Assessing evidence on an application under IR 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 14.8 — the judgment serves as a timely reminder for insolvency practitioners of the authorities on weighing written evidence where no cross-examination is ordered (see paras [58]–[60]). The court’s reasoning shows how this principled approach shaped its evaluation of the material across the judgment (see paras [56]–[100]). The correct measure of damages for a breach of a covenant not to alter — the court undertook a closely reasoned analysis explaining why, on these facts, expectation loss was preferred to reliance loss. This guidance will assist property and...
Sian Participation Corp (in liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd ( Virgin Islands) [2024] UKPC 16 What are the practical implications of this case? Encouragingly for creditors, a debtor can no longer derail a winding-up petition simply by declining to acknowledge liability at all. Absent a dispute that is bona fide and materially arguable, creditors may proceed to liquidate a company without contrived postponement, facilitating the realisation of assets for return to the wider creditor body. If, however, the indebtedness is truly contested on substantive grounds, the matter must be referred to arbitration in the ordinary course before any winding-up application is properly advanced. Contracting parties should therefore think carefully about the reach of arbitration clauses included within their contracts and agreements. Although this outcome holds where wide, general wording is used, other issues could readily arise if an arbitration clause is drafted expressly to...
Consult Practice Note: Litigation funding agreements—investment top-ups. For overviews...
In this issue: Key R& I developments Insolvency litigation Personal insolvency Corporate insolvency processes Restructuring The office-holder Directors and insolvency Financial institutions R& I in Scotland Daily and weekly news alerts New content Key R& I developments South Square Digest— July 2024 The July 2024 issue of the South Square Digest has been released. See News Analysis: South Square Digest— July 2024. Insolvency litigation Appeals arising from deficient judicial reasoning ( Singh v Garcha) On appeal before Mr Justice Zacaroli, the High Court dealt with a largely successful challenge grounded chiefly in the trial judge’s omission to provide reasons for determinations. In short, the appellate court found that, on several matters, the judge’s reasoning was inadequate, so a retrial is required for substantial portions of the appellant’s application. However, the court rejected the appellant’s complaint about the sufficiency of reasons for the finding on detrimental reliance suffered by the second respondent, and it also dismissed an appeal against a costs order in...
Singh (as trustee in bankruptcy of Mrs Angela Garcha) v Garcha and others [2024] EWHC 1844 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The obligation on a judge to provide reasons for their conclusions flows from three core considerations: ensuring that the appellate system can operate effectively ( English v Emery Reimbold & Strick Ltd ( Practice Note) [2002] EWCA Civ 605; [2002] 1 WLR 2409, para [19]) recognising that the parties are entitled to be told how their substantive rights have been decided ( Weymont v Place [2015] EWCA Civ 289, para [6]) upholding fairness by addressing any evidence that appears particularly persuasive, where such material exists ( Simetra Global Assets Ltd v Ikon Finance Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1413, para [46]) That said, a judge is not required to engage with every point raised. It is enough if the...
South Square South Square Digest In this issue, International Judge Jim Peck sets out arguments for adopting US-style mediation across UK restructurings......
According to the Department for Business and Trade, a former Insolvency Service employee, who remains anonymous, supplied The Times, the Financial Times and Sky News in November 2023 with confidential details about the agency’s plan to seek director disqualification against Greensill. The government’s High Court defence, dated 29 April 2024 and now public, asserts this constituted unlawful processing of the Australian businessman’s personal data under the UK GDPR, together with a breach of confidence and misuse of private information. However, the government rejected the contention that the disclosures caused Greensill “significant anxiety and distress”. By then, the department argued, the ex- Citigroup and Morgan Stanley banker’s standing as a businessman was “already significantly, if not irreparably, damaged”. Greensill issued proceedings against the government in March 2024, seeking damages and compensation, contending that the Insolvency Service’s investigation was “an obviously...
Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights—25 July 2024 In this issue: Key R& I law developments Corporate insolvency processes Insolvency litigation Personal insolvency Restructuring The office-holder Directors and insolvency Daily and weekly news alerts Key R& I law developments Insolvency Service publishes annual report and accounts for 2023–2024 The Insolvency Service has released its annual report and accounts for 2023–2024, setting out how the agency has performed over the year and its key activities. Significant highlights this year include the creation of an Anti‑ Money Laundering Intelligence Cell to tackle financial crime more effectively, the introduction of a fresh fee income stream under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, and the launch of a dedicated directors’ guidance hub to help companies navigate insolvency procedures. See: LNB News 23/07/2024 20. Insolvency Service publishes monthly insolvency statistics for June 2024 The...
Tanfield (as executor of the Estate of Paul Watkins) and another company v Meadowbrook Montessori Ltd [2024] EWHC 1759 ( Ch), [2024] All ER ( D) 77 ( Jul) What are the practical implications of this case? The court’s assessment of the respondent’s cross‑claim is especially significant for the following reasons: Forfeiture and the common law rules—the judgment sets out the arguments underpinning the company’s ‘strongly arguable case’ that a purported forfeiture by peaceable re‑entry was unlawful where no formal common law demand for rent was made before re‑entry and the lease did not waive the requirement for such a demand (see paras [75]–[84]). This element of the ruling serves as a useful reminder of the prior demand rules at common law which may bite where a proviso for re‑entry in the lease does not expressly dispense with the necessity for a formal rent demand....
Boris Franz Becker (a bankrupt) v Ford and others [2024] EWHC 1001 ( Ch), [2024] All ER ( D) 11 ( May) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling offers a clear distillation of the approach reflected in the authorities reviewed by Chief ICC Judge Briggs, summarised as: If the court has previously found non-compliance warranting a suspension of discharge, it should likewise be persuaded that the bankrupt has later co-operated to a level aligned with his duties under the Insolvency Act 1986 ( IA 1986). As a rule, the court will attach proper weight to a report from the official receiver or the trustee; as officers of the court, they possess insight into the bankruptcy and can brief the court on the bankrupt's conduct. Co-operation exists on a sliding scale: at one end sit bankrupts who are...
Lime and Black BPS Ltd (in liquidation) v Gill and others [2024] EWHC 1898 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Many insolvency practitioners confront incomplete or almost non-existent books and records. That does not stop the court receiving oral testimony and setting it against the limited paperwork or other established/proven facts. In this matter, the court proceeded step by step, weighing what it had heard with what it could see, and reached a series of conclusions, not all to the applicant liquidator’s benefit. Those conclusions were sufficient for the court to find that the respondent was a de facto director, that he had breached his duties as a director, and that he should be held liable for all payments made by the company to him and for payments made by the company to third parties from accounts under his...
Manolete Partners plc v Bell and others [2024] EWHC 1636 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision offers additional backing to office-holders and funders bringing claims against delinquent directors. Where there is no sign that creditor interests were considered, the director will be judged by an objective benchmark, as set out in HLC Environmental Projects Ltd (in liq) [2013] EWHC 2876 ( Ch). It is also noteworthy that when a hybrid matter becomes a solely Part 7 claim, it may still remain on the insolvency list. What was the background? BSS was incorporated on 27 April 2010 as Building Software Solutions Ltd, later changing its name to BSS LED Ltd (“ Company”) on 3 May 2012. On 15 October 2018 it adopted its current name, inserting the characters “[ R& D]”. The Company stopped trading on 31 March 2019 and all...
Prince Hussam Bin Saud and another v Mobile Telecommunications Company KSCP [2024] EWHC 1724 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The decision offers clear, practical guidance on applying the ‘good arguable case’ limb when seeking permission to serve the petition outside the jurisdiction, pursuant to Schedule 4 of the Insolvency ( England and Wales) Rules 2016 and CPR 6.37. It further emphasises how the appellate court treats attempts to overturn a first instance judge’s assessment of the facts—in particular, whether the appellant debtor maintained a place of residence within the jurisdiction at any point during the three years before the petition was presented. In addressing these issues, the judge also drew together and explained the authorities on what amounts to a place of residence for the purposes of IA 1986, s 265, which operates as a threshold...
Wright and another (liquidators of BHS Group Ltd and other companies (all in liquidation)) v Chappell and others [2024] EWHC 1417 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This is an important judgment that maps the many risks and potentially competing obligations confronting directors as they try to navigate a distressed company away from insolvency, where the prospect of failure can shift from possible, to probable, to inevitable. The result on the trading misfeasance claim shows that the moment when liability can arise for directors who do not take account of creditors’ interests and who fail to move straight to administration can be identified, even if the criteria for a wrongful trading claim (under IA 1986, s 214) are not yet fulfilled. It remains to be seen how the court will ultimately assess equitable compensation for that aspect of the...
Mitchell and others v Al Jaber; Al Jaber and others v JJW Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 423 What are the practical implications of this case? In most cases, once a company enters liquidation, directors recognise they have no ongoing function after a liquidator is appointed and simply meet their obligation to co-operate with the liquidator. If they nevertheless choose to make decisions or take action after liquidation, they risk being treated as intermeddlers. As intermeddlers, directors assume a fresh suite of duties and, if these are breached, the liquidator may bring a claim against them. Though it is uncommon for directors to try to continue directing or influencing a company in liquidation, this judgment allows liquidators to remind directors to yield to the liquidator’s authority and, if a director still acts rashly, to hold them liable for any losses or damage resulting from such...
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...
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Anderson [2024] EWHC 1090 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Using BBL and CBIL funds for aims not permitted under the schemes’ terms, on its own, can be enough to ground a finding of misconduct and demonstrate unfitness leading to disqualification......
Re a company [2024] EWHC 1070 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling materially simplifies, in practical terms, the enforcement of foreign judgment debts in England and Wales by permitting creditors to commence insolvency proceedings as the chosen route. There is no longer any necessity to pursue registration, or to obtain prior recognition of the relevant foreign judgment at the outset. It also clarifies and affirms that the conclusions reached in Valeriy Ernestovich Drelle v Servis- Terminal LLC [2024] EWHC 521 ( Ch)—namely, that an unrecognised or unregistered foreign judgment can properly found a bankruptcy petition—apply with equal force in the corporate sphere. Taken together, this provides judgment creditors with an extra enforcement pathway that is potentially quicker, procedurally more direct, and more cost-effective to deploy. What was the background? In late 2010, the respondent obtained a Lebanese judgment for...
Practice Note: Litigation funding agreements—priorities agreements For summaries, consult the Practice Note on litigation funding agreements—priorities agreements......
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
