Together Personal Finance Limited, a finance company, had lent money to Ms Myranna Boult on the security of her home. It brought possession proceedings. Ms Boult defended the proceedings, relying on the rule in Pigot’s Case, on the basis that the
More about Boult v Together Personal Finance LtdThe claimant in charterparty proceedings was a German individual, but acting as insolvency officeholder of four insolvent German companies. The defendants applied for security for costs. The court applied English law to save the costs of adducing expert evidence on
More about Undritz v D’Amico Tankers DACYerbury v Azets Holdings Ltd [2025] EWHC 757 In Yerbury v Azets, the difference between the individual practitioners and their firm came under the microscope. A lender had appointed Law of Property Act receivers from CLB Coopers. The receivers sold
More about Personally liable and the liable person – what the courts said in 2025The Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA) was the Government’s decisive response to the Grenfell fire tragedy, based on Dame Judith Hackett’s review of building safety. Aimed at improving the safety of people in and around buildings and improving building standards,
More about Do due diligence and your own surveys before appointmentKMG SICAV-SIF-GB Strategic Land Fund (referred to in the judgment as “the sub-fund”), was a so-called “dedicated fund” of a specialised investment company called KMG SICAV-SIF-SA, which had been incorporated as a Luxembourg public limited company in 2008. That company
More about Yorkshire Council v KMG
Over time that equal treatment principle has been modified for policy reasons born of economic considerations: the introduction of statutory priorities, the recognition of priorities within priorities, and, to take an obvious example, the preservation of certain security rights. The
More about Third party release – An essential element of insolvency rescue?Restructuring Plans: should an opposing creditor be granted security for costs? Might that open the floodgates where companies are by definition “distressed,” or was this particular Plan more akin to ordinary adversarial litigation? Read our summary below. Consort Healthcare (Tameside)
More about Re Consort HealthcareThe application in Re Smile Telecoms Holdings Ltd [2022] EWHC 740 (Ch) deals with a number of questions: what constitutes a “compromise or arrangement” for the purpose of Part 26A Companies Act 2006; the effect of an order made at
More about Smile telecoms holdings Ltd [2022] EWHC 740 (Ch) out of the money creditors exclusion.