19 March 2009 / Mark Parkhouse , Kerry Scott

Issue: 7361 / Categories: Opinion , Local government , Public

printer

mail-detail

A fair deal?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Mark Parkhouse & Kerry Scott on the criticism of pre-package administrations

* * * * * *

Insolvency issues are rarely far from the front page of most newspapers these days. In particular, the use of prepackaged administrations (pre-packs) has been the focus of vigorous recent criticism.

This article considers if the criticisms are justified and whether current provisions, including the Statement of Insolvency Practice 16 “Pre-packaged Sales in Administrations” (SIP 16) (which came into effect in England and Wales on 1 January 2009), will appease creditors' concerns.

Aims of administration

In order to consider pre-packs in context, it is first useful to recap on the aims which are imposed on administrators by legislation (Insolvency Act 1986 (as amended), Sch B1, para 3(1)):

(i) The prime objective—to rescue the company as a going concern; or

(ii) The second objective—to achieve a better result for the company's creditors as a whole than would otherwise be the case if the company were simply to be wound up (without first

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

A fair deal?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Mark Parkhouse & Kerry Scott on the criticism of pre-package administrations

* * * * * *

Insolvency issues are rarely far from the front page of most newspapers these days. In particular, the use of prepackaged administrations (pre-packs) has been the focus of vigorous recent criticism.

This article considers if the criticisms are justified and whether current provisions, including the Statement of Insolvency Practice 16 “Pre-packaged Sales in Administrations” (SIP 16) (which came into effect in England and Wales on 1 January 2009), will appease creditors' concerns.

Aims of administration

In order to consider pre-packs in context, it is first useful to recap on the aims which are imposed on administrators by legislation (Insolvency Act 1986 (as amended), Sch B1, para 3(1)):

(i) The prime objective—to rescue the company as a going concern; or

(ii) The second objective—to achieve a better result for the company's creditors as a whole than would otherwise be the case if the company were simply to be wound up (without first

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS

NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders

Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners

NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do

A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent

Your magistrates’ court needs you!

Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process

NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed

Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’

NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits

A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’

back-to-top-scroll