header-logo header-logo

08 February 2013 / Simon Duncan
Issue: 7547 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Upsetting the balance

istock_000016468623medium_2

Liquidators can apply the hindsight principle when assessing whether a company is past the point of no return, reports Simon Duncan

Much has been written about the Court of Appeal’s decision in BNY Corporate Trustee Services Limited v Eurosail UK 2007-3BL PLC [2011] EWCA Civ 227. The decision has been appealed to the Supreme Court and is listed to be heard from 25 February 2013.

Since the decision was handed down, lawyers representing liquidators of failed trading companies have encountered difficulty pursuing antecedent claims against the former directors (delinquent directors). This is because the delinquent directors have used the decision to argue that the impugned transactions were not effected at the “relevant time” as defined in s 240 (2) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986).

Section 240 (2) states: “Where a company enters into a transaction at an undervalue or gives a preference at a time mentioned in subs-s (1)(a) or (b), that time is not a relevant time for the purposes of s 238 or 239 unless the company—(a) is at

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Global finance group strengthened by returning partner in London

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll