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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll