header-logo header-logo

Bilta confirms scope of fraudulent trading provisions

12 May 2025
Categories: Legal News , Insolvency
printer mail-detail
The Supreme Court has dismissed both sides’ appeals in the landmark insolvency case of Bilta

Bilta v Tradition Financial Services [2025] UKSC 18 concerned tax liabilities arising from a form of VAT fraud involving EU carbon credit trading known as ‘missing trader intra-community fraud’.

Insolvent companies brought proceedings against Tradition, arguing it had knowingly participated in the scheme, and was liable for having dishonestly assisted the directors of the fraudulent companies in breaching their duties as directors.

The dispute centred on whether Tradition fell within the scope of s 213, Insolvency Act 1986, and whether the dishonest assistance claim was time-barred. The High Court and Court of Appeal held Tradition was within scope and was also time-barred.

Both sides appealed. Handing down judgment this week, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed both appeals and upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal.

Section 213 gives the court powers to make parties contribute to the assets of an insolvent company if, in the course of the winding up of the company, it emerges they were ‘knowingly’ parties to business carried out with a fraudulent purpose.

Sophia Purkis, partner, Fladgate, said: ‘The Supreme Court has upheld the landmark decision in Bilta which shall help liquidators and the victims of fraud to recover losses using s 213 Insolvency Act 1986. 

‘The provision was held to extend beyond a strict reading of “any persons who were knowingly parties to the carrying on of the business” as referring solely to the company’s management and control by holding that “it could very well apply to someone routinely transacting with the company in the knowledge that the company was carrying on a fraudulent business”. Again, the court has demonstrated that it shall interpret legislation using strict principles which may assist victims to find recourse.’

Categories: Legal News , Insolvency
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll