header-logo header-logo

17 May 2012 / Clare Arthurs
Issue: 7514 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Liable to be liable?

Clare Arthurs tackles insolvency practitioners & personal liability

Good news for insolvency practitioners (IPs); bad news for disgruntled creditors: the High Court has held that IPs will not be personally liable for the costs of litigation commenced against them.

Round one

In Wright Hassall LLP v Duncan Morris [2012] EWHC 188 (Ch), Morris became administrator of two companies, which were defendants in ongoing litigation (the companies). Wright Hassall LLP (WH) agreed to act, and two conditional fee agreements (CFAs) were entered into: one for the initial advice given, and one for conducting the litigation. The CFAs were addressed to “Mr D Morris, the Redfern Partnership” and (unlike many of the other documents drawn up by both Morris and WH) they did not contain any disclaimer for Morris’ personal liability.

WH issued a claim form for unpaid invoices in March 2009 against Morris and his partner, trading as Redfern Partnership (Redfern). Morris argued that he had retained WH in his capacity as administrator and not in a personal capacity. The contemporaneous correspondence supported

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

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll