header-logo header-logo

Liable to be liable?

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll