header-logo header-logo

13 January 2017 / Helen Mulcahy , Davina Bentley
Issue: 7729 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Paying dividends

nlj_7729_bentley

Davina Bentley & Helen Mulcahy examine dividend payments to the detriment of creditors

  • What occurs in a case where dividends which were authorised by the directors of a company to the parent company set off an intra company debt?

In BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and others; B.A.T. Industries plc v Sequana SA and another [2016] EWHC 1686 (Ch), [2016] All ER (D) 96 (Jul), the court considered dividends which were authorised by the directors of AWA to the parent company Sequana, which set off an intra company debt.

BTI was the assignee of claims from AWA, which challenged the payment of the dividends on the basis of Pt 23 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), against the four former AWA directors. In a second claim heard jointly with BTI’s claim, BAT alleged that the dividends contravened s 423 Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) so Sequana and AWA should account for the payments.

Factual background

The facts of the case were complex but are summarised as follows: a US entity, AWA, was formed

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll