header-logo header-logo

19 February 2010
Issue: 7405 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Insolvency

Irish Reel Productions Ltd v Capitol Films Ltd [2010] EWHC 180 (Ch), [2010] All ER (D) 111 (Feb)

Rule 2.12(1)(e) of the Insolvency Rules 1986 permitted a person who had presented a winding-up petition to appear at the hearing of an administration application to enable that person to seek an order for the costs of that petition, which would ordinarily be dismissed at the hearing of the administration application, if an administration order was made.

The phrase “the costs … of any person whose costs are allowed by the court” in r 2.12(3) comprehended not merely that person’s costs of appearing at the hearing of an administration application, but that person’s costs of any petition which was dismissed at the same time, where the court thought fit to make such an order. The remaining words of r 2.12(3) then automatically provided for such costs to be payable as an expense of the administration, and to fall within the words in r 2.67(1)(c), namely “the costs of …any person appearing on the hearing of the application…”.
 

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

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime specialist joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
Could an online LLM in Commercial and Technology Law expand your career options?
The controversial Courts and Tribunals Bill has passed its second reading by 304 votes to 203, despite concerted opposition from the legal profession
The presumption of parental involvement is to be abolished, the Lord Chancellor David Lammy has confirmed
A highly experienced chartered legal executive has been prevented from representing her client in financial remedies proceedings, in a case that highlights the continued fallout from Mazur
Plans to commandeer 50%-75% of the interest on lawyers’ client accounts to fund the justice system overlook the cost and administrative burden of this on small and medium law firms, CILEX has warned
back-to-top-scroll