Moorhead James LLP Solicitors

NEWS

Accountant Ordered to Repay £150,000 - An accountant who defrauded his employer of nearly £900,000 over a decade was ordered to repay £150,000 (the maximum amount of assets available for seizure) and was sent to prison for three years .... more

Businessmen Denied Profit for 'Borrowed' Business Plan - When someone breaches a confidence and uses confidential information to make a profit, one of the legal remedies which may be sought is to require the person committing the breach to account for the profit made as a result .... more

Contract Clinches Fee for Ex-Advisers - It is not uncommon for a company to switch financial advisers when it is seeking to do a deal, but doing so without a full appreciation of the implications of the contract with the financial advisers who have been shown the door can be an expensive mistake .... more

Court Supports Ex-Director's Right to Start New Business - When senior employees leave a company, the commercial risks presented can be considerable .... more

New Company Name Check Facility - On 28 April, Companies House introduced a new 'Company Name Availability Search' as part of its WebCHeck service, which will return the 'same as' matches as defined in the Companies Act 2006 .... more

Insolvency – Court Considers Repeated Notices - When a notice that a company intends to appoint an administrator is given, there is a moratorium lasting ten business days, which gives the company a breathing space in which to put together a rescue deal and other interested parties time to consider their positions .... more

Insurance Provisions in Commercial Leases by Robert Sweet - Severe damage to or destruction of demised premises can cause enormous problems for both a landlord and tenant. The landlord's investment could be affected if the premises are under-insured, and the tenant's trade will, of course, be disrupted in respect of commercial premises .... more

New Minimum Wage Rates - New rates for the National Minimum Wage (NMW) will come into force on 1 October 2010 .... more

Sickness and Annual Leave - The question as to whether employees who are off work due to sickness for more than a year are entitled to paid statutory holiday under the Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR) was dealt with in the case of Stringer and others v HM Revenue and Customs .... more

Without Prejudice Challenge Fails - A company that sought to give as evidence in court 'without prejudice' comments made by the company with which it was in dispute met with a firm rebuff from the Court of Appeal recently .... more

Pause or Play

down

Moorhead James LLP
Solicitors
Kildare House
3 Dorset Rise
London EC4Y 8EN

DX:
288 London/Chancery Lane

Tel: 020 7831 8888
Fax: 020 7936 3635

In association with firms in Frankfurt, Paris, Rome, Milan, Prague, Budapest, Beijing and Hong Kong.

Moorhead James LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England - Number OC340235. Registered Office: Kildare House, 3 Dorset Rise, London EC4Y 8EN

The members (who are also known as Partners) of Moorhead James LLP are:

BRK Moorhead
JJH Bishop
CM Bowyer-Jones
DJ James
ECL Wheen
SA Simões

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

NEWS : Insolvency – Court Considers Repeated Notices

When a notice that a company intends to appoint an administrator is given, there is a moratorium lasting ten business days, which gives the company a breathing space in which to put together a rescue deal and other interested parties time to consider their positions. After ten days, the notice expires.

The relevant section of the Insolvency Act 1986 (para 28(2) of Schedule B1) reads 'An appointment may not be made … after the period of ten business days beginning with the date on which the notice of intention to appoint is filed …'.

The legislation does not make it clear when the prohibition on appointing an administrator expires. If the directors of a company file such a notice and then fail to appoint an administrator, can they then file a second notice and appoint an administrator afterwards? On the other hand, if directors could simply file a notice every ten days, could they then prevent the appointment of an administrator indefinitely?

A recent case considered these questions. A company had intended to enter into a 'pre-pack' administration and filed a notice to appoint an administrator to facilitate that. Unfortunately, the pre-pack did not proceed within the ten-day period, so no administrator was appointed. The directors still wished to put the company into administration and went to court to seek permission to do so. The court accepted that there could be good reasons why the appointment of an administrator could not be concluded within ten business days. It therefore ruled that the company in this case could file a second notice. However, the court stressed that it was not condoning repeated filings where there is no intention of appointing an administrator and noted that it has the power to impose penalties on directors who abuse the procedure.

Says Christopher Mackie, "In this case, the court took a commonsense approach to the problem, which is to be welcomed by all those involved in the tricky business of insolvency. If you are experiencing difficulties in your business, we can advise you on all legal issues."

Solicitor London - Moorhead James LLP