header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
26 November 2020
Issue: 7912 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 27 November 2020

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Company

Re Taylor Pearson (Construction) Ltd (in administration) [2020] EWHC 2933 (Ch), [2020] All ER (D) 88 (Nov)

The applicant creditors failed in their application, pursuant to paras 74 and/or 75 of Sch B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986, for the revocation of certain proposals submitted by the administrators which were purported to have been deemed approved. In dismissing the application, the Chancery Division decided that the reasons submitted by the applicants for the revocation of the proposals at issue lacked merit. The court further held that, looking at the position more generally, the administrators had all but completed realising assets and had authority to make a distribution to unsecured creditors and had funds to pay preferential creditors. Accordingly, there was little point in placing the company into liquidation, as proposed by the creditors, even if the earlier findings were wrong.

Competition

AB Volvo (Publ) and others v Ryder Ltd and others [2020] EWCA Civ 1475, [2020] All ER (D) 81 (Nov)

In dismissing the appellants’ appeal, the Court of Appeal,

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
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’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll