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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Armstrong and another v Harrow [2025] EWHC 1790 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision offers clear guidance on the boundaries of the equity of exoneration, particularly in scenarios involving spouse-owned companies and joint borrowing. The court held that a joint proprietor cannot invoke the equity simply because funds were used for the other party or their business. Where both co-owners are directors and shareholders of the borrower, they will be regarded as co‑principal debtors, even if one maintains they played only a minor role. The ruling confirms that courts will look beyond formal titles, late efforts to distance oneself (such as resignations or statements of non‑interest), and conventional spousal roles when deciding whether a person truly obtained no benefit or bore no responsibility for the liabilities. It also shows a firm application of the Insolvency Act 1986 ( IA 1986) to...
Corporate Rescue and Insolvency The newest issue of Corporate Rescue and Insolvency ( August 2025) can be accessed on Lexis +® UK (subscription needed)......
In this issue: Key R& I law developments Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation The office-holder Financial institutions Daily and weekly news alerts Corporate Rescue and Insolvency ( August 2025) Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals Key R& I law developments Companies House announces mandatory ID verification timeline starting November 2025 Companies House confirmed that compulsory identity checks under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 ( ECCTA 2023) begin on 18 November 2025. Prospective directors must verify before incorporation or appointment, and existing directors will do so with their next confirmation statement. Persons with significant control have a 12-month transition to complete checks. The regime captures around 6–7 million people, who must finish verification by November 2026. Verification will run via GOV. UK One Login or through...
Kieran Bourne & Tunluk Ltd v Tunaru and others [2025] EWHC 1762 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision stands out as the first reported occasion on which a court has found a director liable for fraudulent trading arising during the COVID‑19 pandemic, encompassing both requests for government‑backed Bounce Back Loans and claims for furlough payments under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme ( CJRS). Regarding the Bounce Back Loans, the court concluded it could determine actual dishonesty on the director’s part without cross‑examining him, because he had been barred from adducing any evidence following breach of an ‘unless’ order. It further ruled that the explanations advanced in the Defence and in pre‑action correspondence were undermined by the contemporaneous records and documents that were produced, with the result that a finding of the requisite dishonesty was possible on the...
Hopcraft and another v Close Brothers Limited; Johnson v First Rand Bank Limited ( London Branch) t/a Moto Novo Finance; Wrench v First Rand Bank Limited ( London Branch) t/a Moto Novo Finance [2025] UKSC 33 Background These three conjoined appeals addressed payments of commission by finance lenders to motor dealers for arranging hire purchase finance on cars, where that remuneration was not revealed, or only partly revealed, to the car hirers. In the usual scenario, a buyer attends a dealership, selects a vehicle, and agrees a price with the dealer. The dealer then secures a finance offer from a lender on hire purchase terms. Acting on the lender’s behalf, the dealer puts that offer to the customer. In every appeal, the dealer made profit on the vehicle sale and, significantly, also obtained a commission from the lender for introducing the business. Either the fact of...
South Square Digest In this issue, Wiliam Willson and Charlotte Ward explore the insolvency consequences of ‘double dip’ transactions. Georgina Peters and Lindsay Hingston ( Freshfields, London) examine the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Kington S.À. R. L.......
Forbes v Interbay Funding Ltd; Forbes and Seculink Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 690 What are the practical implications of this case? The Court of Appeal has reinforced the position of secured lenders seeking to recover the principal balance of a secured borrowing that has been called in, confirming that this principal is outside the scope of an MHCM under the Regulations. The ruling makes clear that the principal of a secured debt is not a ‘moratorium debt’, so secured creditors may continue both to pursue repayment of the principal and to accrue interest during an MHCM, even where the facility has been demanded. By narrowing the debts shielded by a moratorium, the decision offers useful certainty to lenders and debtors alike: it safeguards secured lenders’ enforcement rights, trims back debtor protections under the Regulations, and ensures moratoria do not defer enforcement of secured...
Bilta ( UK) Ltd (in liquidation) and others v Tradition Financial Services Ltd; Nathanael Eurl Ltd (in liquidation) and another v Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2025] UKSC 18 What are the practical implications of this case? Regarding IA 1986, s 213, advisers may take comfort that, as the statute provides, any individual involved in running a fraudulent business falls within the scope of a s 213 claim. The potential pool of defendants to fraudulent trading allegations is, accordingly, without inherent limit, though—as always—intensely dependent on the facts. In practice, this lets liquidators be selective, choosing defendants by likely recoverability as well as their culpability. As for LA 1980, s 32, this judgment underlines that the limitation clock does not stop merely because a company has been dissolved. The baseline position is that claims here framed as breaches of duty must be issued within six years of the...
Batra v Castle Trust Capital Plc and another [2025] EWHC 1555 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Batra v Castle affirms the strong presumption against the court ordering a stay of bankruptcy proceedings while any appeal by the bankrupt against the bankruptcy order is pending determination. Adopting the approach in Foster v Davenport (2011) (unreported), as cited in Tyschenko v Hyde [2024] EWHC 838 ( Ch), the court reiterated and applied that position. These authorities make plain that a stay will be entertained only in exceptional circumstances—that is, where there are substantial grounds of appeal and the applicant establishes that an order of bankruptcy would cause irreparable harm. As a result, debtors must put forward, and properly evidence, every viable point at the hearing of the bankruptcy petition itself, rather than reserving arguments for later. Once a bankruptcy order has been made,...
Ciddy Ltd v Natalia [2025] EWHC 1616 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Ciddy v Natalia will be of keen interest to practitioners acting for both lenders and borrowers, as it affirms that a debtor may resist a bankruptcy petition grounded on a credit agreement where the contractual terms are capable of being impugned, or where the character of the relationship arising from that agreement can properly be attacked as unfair. That conclusion applies whether the challenge is aimed at the small print itself or at the fairness of the dealings generated by the agreement between the parties. The judgment underscores that lenders must stay alive to how they treat borrowers on an individual basis, attending to borrower-specific circumstances throughout the borrowing journey, from initial arrangement through to enforcement. It also stands as a clear reminder that clauses imposing a high...
In this issue: Key R& I law developments Personal insolvency Restructuring Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation The office-holder Financial institutions Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New content Key R& I law developments Government consults on proposed reforms to the NSI Act 2021 mandatory notification regime The UK government has opened a consultation on amendments to the National Security and Investment Act 2021 ( Notifiable Acquisition) ( Specification of Qualifying Entities) Regulations 2021, which set the boundaries of the NSI Act’s mandatory notification regime. Headline proposals are: (i) creating two discrete categories for semiconductors and critical minerals, (ii) introducing a mandatory notification area for the water sector, and (iii) refining several existing sectors to enhance certainty and reflect technological and market change. The consultation runs until 14 October 2025. See: LNB News...
Saipem S. P. A. and other companies v Petrofac Ltd and another company [2025] EWCA Civ 821 What are the practical implications of this case? On the ‘no worse off’ test, the judgment firmly confirms that, when deciding if Condition A is met, the court must juxtapose the monetary value of a plan creditor’s pre-existing rights in the relevant alternative with the value of the new or altered rights offered by the plan. For jurisdiction under Part 26A, the primacy of rights over interests is fundamental (para [90]). Accordingly, Condition A obliges the court to ascertain the financial worth that a creditor’s existing rights would probably realise in the relevant alternative, and to set this against the financial value of the replacement or varied rights the plan provides in exchange for compromising those rights (para [79]). Collateral advantages or...
In this issue: Key R& I law developments Insolvency litigation Directors and insolvency Creditors’ participation International restructuring and insolvency Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New content New Q& As Key R& I law developments Insolvency Service publishes annual plan for 2025–26 fiscal year The Insolvency Service has set out its annual plan for 2025–26, detailing objectives and priorities for the coming fiscal year. As the final year of its current five-year strategy, the plan emphasises supporting economic growth and stability via a more robust regulatory regime. Core aims include bolstering the insolvency framework, tackling financial misconduct, and assisting people facing financial difficulty. The Service also indicates that new longer-term strategic plans, covering Scotland, England and Wales, will be unveiled in early 2026. See: LNB News 22/07/2025...
Péretié v Eden Farm Srl [2025] EWHC 1349 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? When parties disagree about the validity of a debt and a creditor opts to use bankruptcy as an enforcement route rather than issuing proceedings to test the debt, the first move is to serve a statutory demand. The court may set aside a statutory demand where there is a genuine triable issue that could reduce the purported liability below the bankruptcy threshold. However, if the arguable point is about jurisdiction, that cannot justify setting aside the demand, because only once a bankruptcy petition is presented must the creditor show that this jurisdiction is the proper one. As a result, a debtor relying solely on a jurisdictional defence has, until now, been unable to prevent a petition from being brought, which can have...
In this issue: Key R& I law developments Personal insolvency Directors and insolvency Insolvency litigation Financial institutions Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New content Key R& I law developments Insolvency Service launches five-year strategy to combat economic crime The Insolvency Service has unveiled its 2026–31 investigation and enforcement plan, materially broadening its role in addressing economic crime. It sets three principal aims: enforcing the UK insolvency framework, applying the Companies Act 1985, and tackling company-enabled economic crime. To counter money laundering and complex financial misconduct, it will deploy artificial intelligence and advanced analytics, while deepening cryptoasset expertise. Recent results evidence impact: 77 criminal convictions, more than 1,000 director disqualifications, and £4m in compensation secured in 2024–25. See: LNB News 16/07/2025 55. Personal insolvency Can a bankruptcy petition be determined at a hearing fixed to consider a set-aside application? In what circumstances can a guarantee support a...
Practice Note: An insolvency office-holder's guide to fraud and asset recovery claims Consult this Practice Note for guidance on fraud and asset recovery claims. For an overview of actions available to an insolvent estate or its insolvency office-holder, see: Claims by an insolvent estate or its insolvency office-holder—overview......
In this issue: Personal insolvency Restructuring Creditors’ participation R& I in Scotland Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New content New Q& As Personal insolvency Court rules on meaning of ‘ Place of Residence’ in bankruptcy jurisdiction appeal ( Mobile Telecommunications Company KSCP v HRH Prince Hussam Bin Saud Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud) The Court of Appeal ( Lord Justice Newey, Lord Justice Snowden and Lady Justice Whipple) was asked to consider whether the High Court had correctly dismissed a bankruptcy petition issued by Mobile Telecommunications Company KSCP. The Company and Prince Hussam, a Saudi royal, have long disputed unpaid arbitration awards totalling about US$900m. The pivotal question was whether, for section 265(2)(b)(i) of the Insolvency Act 1986, Prince Hussam had “a place of residence in England and Wales”. The...
Bhundia v Dhar [2025] EWHC 1227 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment underscores the standard expected of chairs of creditors’ meetings when assessing proofs of debt. A finding of material irregularity showed the original liquidator’s appointment was defective: Mr Bhundia’s proof was not admitted to vote for the correct amount, and Mr Dhar’s vote was accepted when it should not have been. Accordingly, those presiding as chair (including directors or insolvency practitioners) must verify all claims, since their determinations are vulnerable to the court forming its own conclusion on the balance of probabilities if a challenge is brought. Errors can unravel the outcome of the meeting, requiring a fresh decision procedure. Secondly, the decision clarifies the limited finality of construction adjudication awards in an insolvency setting. The court firmly rejected Mr Dhar’s reliance on res judicata and merger,...
In this issue: Corporate insolvency process Personal insolvency Document review Restructuring Directors and insolvency Creditor participation Employees and insolvency Partnership insolvency International restructuring and insolvency Daily and weekly news alerts New content New Q& As Corporate insolvency process Contested debt and shift from members’ voluntary liquidation to creditors’ voluntary liquidation ( Noal SCSp v Novalpina Capital LLP (in members voluntary liquidation)) This ruling makes clear that where a company in members’ voluntary liquidation ( MVL) cannot satisfy all liabilities in full, together with interest at the official rate, within the timeframe specified in the directors’ declaration under section 89 of the Insolvency Act 1986 ( IA 1986), it must move into creditors’ voluntary liquidation ( CVL). There is no solvency assessment available to alter that timeframe. As the entity is already in liquidation, the liquidator lacks any discretion and is required, by IA 1986, s 95, to effect the conversion from MVL to CVL. No...
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
