header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Not back to the future?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
12 February 2016 / Benjamin Caswell
Issue: 7686 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail
nlj_7686_caswell

When a dissolved company is restored what happens to its former property, asks Benjamin Caswell

In the Back to the Future film franchise Marty McFly travelled backwards and forwards in time by 30 years, first to 1955 and back, and then to 2015 and back. The similarities and differences between the predicted 2015 featured therein and the real 2015 have been commented upon elsewhere. Much of the dramatic tension in the first film revolved around the need to ensure that Marty’s trip to the past did not disturb the reality of his present.

Prestwick

It is doubtful that the Inner House of the Court of Session in Scotland had the film franchise in mind when they gave their recent decision in ELB Securities Ltd v Alan Love & Prestwick Hotels Ltd [2015] CSIH 67, but nonetheless the same dramatic tension is involved.

The issue that faced them is what happens when a dissolved company is restored, in particular what happens to the property that it once owned?

In case English practitioners

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
Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll