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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights—6 June 2024 In this issue: Key R& I law developments Insolvency litigation Restructuring Corporate insolvency processes The office-holder Daily and weekly news alerts New content Key R& I law developments Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 This Act introduces regulation of competition within digital markets, revises the Competition Act 1998 and the Enterprise Act 2002 with additional competition law measures, and enhances consumer protection by providing and extending rights, together with related purposes. Certain provisions took effect on 24 May 2024; the remainder will commence on a day set by Regulations made by the Secretary of State. See: LNB News 04/06/2024 9. Insolvency litigation Monies paid to a bankrupt’s son were after-acquired property ( Hyde v Djurberg) It is uncommon for a bankrupt to receive a significant payment that a trustee in bankruptcy may claim as...
Re Pindar Scarborough Ltd (in administration) [2024] EWHC 908 ( Ch), [2024] All ER ( D) 72 ( May) What are the practical implications of this case? The First Review records the government’s long-held view that a creditor’s status is fixed at the commencement of the process and continues even where full repayment is later achieved, and noted an intention to amend IR 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 15.11(1) to make that position explicit. If that had accurately reflected the law, numerous administration steps dependent on secured creditor consent would have become far harder to manage—most notably, approval of fees and extensions. After a secured creditor is paid in full during an administration, there is little incentive for them to remain involved or to engage meaningfully with the administrators, as they have no financial stake. An administrator seeking to extend an...
Litigation funding agreements—termination clauses Consult the Practice Note for summaries on termination clauses...
Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights—30 May 2024 In this issue: Key R& I law developments Insolvency litigation Document review Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Restructuring Directors and insolvency Daily and weekly news alerts New content Latest Q& A Key R& I law developments Insolvency ( Amendment) Regulations 2024 SI 2024/722: These Regulations modify the Insolvency Regulations 1994, SI 1994/2507, raising the hourly remuneration payable to the official receiver and their officers for specified services while the official receiver serves as interim receiver, provisional liquidator, liquidator or trustee. They take effect on 9 January 2025. See: LNB News 29/05/2024 34. New regulations complete commencement of REUL( RR) A 2023 The Retained EU Law ( Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 ( Commencement No 2 and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2024, SI 2024/714, commence section 6 of the Retained EU Law (...
Crescent Petroleum Company International Ltd and another company v Retirement, Saving and Welfare Fund of Oil Industry Workers [2024] EWHC 835 ( Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? The decision illustrates how a judgment creditor can pursue enforcement measures against a judgment debtor via IA 1986, s 423. Where the debtor has divested an asset to a third party, the usual relief is an order compelling the transferee to reconvey the property to the transferor, after which allocation amongst the transferor’s creditors is dealt with by the ordinary rules. Nonetheless, IA 1986, s 425 provides the court with latitude to frame relief under IA 1986, s 423 directly against the transferee, requiring the asset to be conveyed to the judgment creditor without a prior re-transfer to the transferor. This route applies where assets have been moved away from the debtor in...
In this issue Key R& I law developments Corporate insolvency processes Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation Property insolvency The office-holder Insurance and insolvency R& I in Scotland Daily and weekly news alerts New content Key R& I law developments Insolvency Service publishes monthly insolvency statistics for April 2024 The Insolvency Service has released its April 2024 monthly statistics covering corporate and personal insolvencies. There were 2,177 registered company insolvencies—18% above April 2023—surpassing levels seen during the coronavirus ( COVID-19) pandemic and those recorded from 2014 to 2019. For individuals, total insolvencies in April 2024 were 9,651, a 5% increase on April 2023. See: LNB News 17/05/2024 60. Information Sharing ( Disclosure by the Registrar) Regulations 2024 SI 2024/ Draft These draft Regulations are laid to permit the registrar to disclose information to specified persons to support...
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...
Taytime Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and others [2024] EWHC 1053 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Although this is a permission ruling on an appeal pursuant to TCPA 1990, s 288, the decision serves as a reminder to practitioners that a Planning Inspector must undertake a rigorous assessment where several corporate vehicles front the application and the appeal, remaining alert to questions of agency and insolvency. The court articulated the principles governing when a legitimate expectation can arise that an appeal will be taken forward. The judgment also demonstrates that, on occasion, resolving a planning challenge may necessitate the judge considering permission and the substantive claim to bring additional expertise to bear, for instance where multiple companies are involved and significant procedural issues of agency and insolvency surface, irrespective of the...
In this issue: Key R& I developments Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation Restructuring Daily and weekly news alerts New content Key R& I developments Insolvency Service publishes annual review of IPR for 2023 The Insolvency Service has issued its 2023 annual review of Insolvency Practitioner Regulation, detailing oversight of the profession, the Service’s supervisory work, and actions taken by regulators against their member insolvency practitioners. See: LNB News 15/05/2024 42. Insolvency Service publishes April 2024 enforcement outcomes management information The Insolvency Service has refreshed its enforcement outcomes management information for April 2024, recording 93 director disqualifications and 12 bankruptcy and debt relief restrictions arising from enforcement action. See: LNB News 10/05/2024 36. Corporate insolvency processes Two companies wound up despite disputes and cross claims raised in respect of the petition debts ( Khera v Palladian Capital...
Consult Practice Note: Litigation funding agreements—representations and warranties. For...
Khera v Palladian Capital Ltd and another [2024] EWHC 1009 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Conventional wisdom holds that winding-up petitions founded on disputed debts, or where the debtor has a viable cross claim, ought not to be pursued and should be refused. The bar to show such disputes or cross claims is low and, when petitions are dismissed or injuncted to prevent their continuation, indemnity costs are frequently imposed on petitioners. Consequently, parties are understandably reluctant to issue winding-up petitions when they anticipate a response raising a dispute or a cross claim. This judgment, however, offers a timely reminder of two points: first, notwithstanding the modest merits threshold, the court can—and should—examine the underlying papers with rigour, much like a summary judgment exercise. A bare assertion of dispute or cross claim should not, by itself, defeat a...
In this issue: Personal insolvency Restructuring Insolvency litigation Directors and insolvency Corporate insolvency processes R& I in Scotland Daily and weekly news alerts New content Personal insolvency Application to stay bankruptcy (possession and sale of home)—key principles ( Tyshchenko v Hyde) The court partly upheld an appeal but, on grounds different from those below, refused an application to stay bankruptcy proceedings concerning possession and sale of the family home. The appeal court considered the jurisdiction to grant a stay, setting out the governing principles, drawing contrasts with other statutory powers, and applying them to this uncommon situation (where no appeal against the bankruptcy order was pending). Although its draft judgment indicated a limited stay might be appropriate, following receipt of fresh evidence the court ultimately dismissed the application. The decision offers a clear...
Sriram (acting by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners and another [2024] EWHC 853 ( Ch), [2024] All ER ( D) 86 ( Apr) What are the practical implications of this case? Creditors should act with care to ensure that service of a statutory demand (and bankruptcy petition) is properly effected, particularly where a debtor seeks to avoid service and has several addresses. Attempts to serve ought to be clearly and contemporaneously recorded. Creditors are required to take all reasonable measures to bring the document or documents to the debtor’s attention. However, this does not oblige them to attend or write to every address associated with the debtor that they know about. The addresses that must be tried will depend on the circumstances of the individual case. A wide, scattergun strategy to service is not expected. By way of...
What are the practical implications of this case? This case’s practical significance lies in the court having to sanction the scheme in an altered form when, after the creditors’ meeting, it emerged that a condition precedent could not be met. The court observed that the resolution presented to, and passed by, the scheme creditors was to approve the scheme subject to whatever modification, addition or condition the court might approve or impose. Both the original and amended schemes also contained a variation provision stating, in substance, that the Company may, at any Sanction Hearing and, where reasonably practicable following consultation with the Ad Hoc Committee’s advisers, give consent on behalf of all Scheme Creditors to any change to, or augmentation of, the Scheme, or to any terms or conditions the Court considers appropriate to approve or impose, provided such change would not, directly or...
Binyon and Parker (as Joint Administrators of VE Global UK Ltd) v Suzerain Investment Holdings Ltd and others [2024] EWHC 749 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of the case? This decision underscores the need to follow the CA 2006 registration regime and to file with the registrar the very instrument that gives rise to the charge. Although a certificate of registration is treated as ‘conclusive evidence’ that the requisite papers were delivered, and courts have on occasion treated charges as effective despite certificates masking flaws in the filing process, that does not stop the court asking whether the documents required to constitute a valid charge were in fact lodged. Non‑registration of a charge does not, naturally, disturb the existence or enforceability of the underlying indebtedness. Yet the security itself will be ineffective as against an appointed liquidator or...
In this issue: Key R& I law developments Insolvency litigation International restructuring and insolvency Corporate insolvency processes Restructuring Directors and insolvency The office-holder Daily and weekly news alerts Corporate Rescue and Insolvency ( April 2024 edition) New Q& A Key R& I law developments The Insolvency Service has released its March 2024 monthly figures for company and individual insolvencies. There were 1,815 registered corporate insolvencies, 17% down on March 2023, yet still above levels seen during the coronavirus ( COVID-19) period and across 2014–2019. Personal insolvencies totalled 8,708, representing a 9% decrease from March 2023. See: LNB News 26/04/2024 64. Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments (2019 Hague Convention etc.) Regulations 2024 SI 2024/ Draft: amendments have been laid to the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 to give effect to the 2019 Hague...
Bourne (as liquidator of MM Apartment Letting Ltd) and another company v Manukyan and another [2024] EWHC 832 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment acts as a helpful illustration of the principles the court will apply and consistently enforce in situations of this nature where numerous unexplained transfers have been made from a company’s bank account ahead of its liquidation, and the sole director fails to provide an adequate justification. What was the background? The applicant liquidator sought relief against Mr Manuk Manukyan, the sole director of MM Apartment Letting Ltd (the ‘ Company’), under IA 1986, ss 212, 238 or 239 in respect of: a dividend declared and paid in June 2018 after the deemed commencement of the winding up petition, where the payment was effected without a validation order; and various payments between 14 August 2017 and 13 April 2018 made by the...
Russian trustee partially succeeds in a strike out application ( Kireeva (as trustee and bankruptcy manager of Bedzhamov) v Zolotova and Basel Properties Limited [2024] EWHC 552 ( Ch)) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment illustrates the court’s granular, issue-by-issue treatment of applications to strike out defences advanced on multiple distinct bases. The court may excise particular elements while permitting other grounds to go forward to trial. It underlines that claims backed by litigation funding can be vulnerable to challenge for champerty and maintenance. Here, the court was troubled by aspects of the funder’s conduct, especially in separate proceedings where it perceived a high degree of funder control over the litigant. Given those concerns, striking out the plea of champerty or maintenance would be inappropriate. That stance applies notwithstanding the comparatively narrow situations in which...
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
