Re Continental Assurance Co of London plc

Last updated

Re Continental Assurance Co of London plc
Court High Court
Citation(s)[2007] 2 BCLC 287; [2001] All ER (D) 229
Keywords
Wrongful trading

Re Continental Assurance Co of London plc [2007] 2 BCLC 287 (also, Singer v. Beckett) is a UK insolvency law case on wrongful trading under section 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Contents

Facts

Continental Assurance plc had gone into insolvent liquidation. The liquidators submitted that the directors were guilty of wrongful trading (Insolvency Act 1986 section 214). They had continued to trade after a crisis meeting, which should have made clear there was no reasonable prospect of coming out of insolvency. The liquidators also alleged misfeasance (section 212) through years of disorganised financial and accounting records and this was what made it difficult to tell whether the company was insolvent. Furthermore, payments to two other companies, IATA and ABTA, showed misfeasance.

Judgment

Park J held that the liquidators had failed to show a case of wrongful trading or misfeasance. The directors' action was appropriate given their available information and advice. They had made careful considerations at the crisis meeting.

Park J also held that if the liquidators were correct about misfeasance, it would only be the finance director that was liable, not the other directors. But the misfeasance claim was in respect of breach of directors' duties to Continental Assurance, and therefore a loss had to be shown. But the payments to IATA and ABTA had caused no loss.

See also

Notes

    Related Research Articles

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Liquidation</span> Winding-up of a company

    Liquidation is the process in accounting by which a company is brought to an end in Canada, United Kingdom, United States, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, and many other countries. The assets and property of the company are redistributed. Liquidation is also sometimes referred to as winding-up or dissolution, although dissolution technically refers to the last stage of liquidation. The process of liquidation also arises when customs, an authority or agency in a country responsible for collecting and safeguarding customs duties, determines the final computation or ascertainment of the duties or drawback accruing on an entry.

    A number of legal systems make provision for companies trading while insolvent to be unlawful in certain circumstances, and provide for directors to become personally liable for a company's debts if they have acted improperly. In most legal systems, the liability in respect of unlawful transactions only extends for a certain period of time prior to the company going into liquidation.

    Wrongful trading is a type of civil wrong found in UK insolvency law, under Section 214 Insolvency Act 1986. It was introduced to enable contributions to be obtained for the benefit of creditors from those responsible for mismanagement of the insolvent company. Under Australian insolvency law the equivalent concept is called "insolvent trading".

    In company law, fraudulent trading is doing business with intent to defraud creditors.

    In law, a liquidator is the officer appointed when a company goes into winding-up or liquidation who has responsibility for collecting in all of the assets under such circumstances of the company and settling all claims against the company before putting the company into dissolution. Liquidator is a person officially appointed to 'liquidate' a company or firm. Their duty is to ascertain and settle the liabilities of a company or a firm. If there are any surplus, then those are distributed to the contributories.

    Re D’Jan of London Ltd [1994] 1 BCLC 561 is a leading English company law case concerning a director's duty of care and skill, whose main precedent is now codified under Section 174 of the Companies Act 2006. The case was decided under the older Companies Act 1985.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">United Kingdom insolvency law</span> Law in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

    United Kingdom insolvency law regulates companies in the United Kingdom which are unable to repay their debts. While UK bankruptcy law concerns the rules for natural persons, the term insolvency is generally used for companies formed under the Companies Act 2006. Insolvency means being unable to pay debts. Since the Cork Report of 1982, the modern policy of UK insolvency law has been to attempt to rescue a company that is in difficulty, to minimise losses and fairly distribute the burdens between the community, employees, creditors and other stakeholders that result from enterprise failure. If a company cannot be saved it is liquidated, meaning that the assets are sold off to repay creditors according to their priority. The main sources of law include the Insolvency Act 1986, the Insolvency Rules 1986, the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, the Employment Rights Act 1996 Part XII, the EU Insolvency Regulation, and case law. Numerous other Acts, statutory instruments and cases relating to labour, banking, property and conflicts of laws also shape the subject.

    Bednash v HearseyorRe DGA (UK) Ltd[2001] EWCA 787 is a UK company law and UK insolvency law case, which held that a director's pay and pension was excessive and grossly negligent, and could be recovered after the company went insolvent.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986</span> United Kingdom legislation

    The Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 forms part of UK company law and sets out the procedures for company directors to be disqualified in certain cases of misconduct.

    <i>Re Produce Marketing Consortium Ltd (No 2)</i>

    Re Produce Marketing Consortium Ltd [1989] 5 BCC 569 was the first UK company law or UK insolvency law case under the wrongful trading provision of s 214 Insolvency Act 1986.

    <i>Re MC Bacon Ltd</i> (No 1)

    Re MC Bacon Ltd [1990] BCLC 324 is a leading UK insolvency law case, concerning transactions at an undervalue and voidable preferences.

    <i>Re Oasis Merchandising Services Ltd</i>

    Re Oasis Merchandising Services Ltd [1998] Ch 170 is a UK insolvency law and company law case, concerning wrongful trading.

    Re Purpoint Ltd [1991] BCLC 491 is a UK insolvency law and company law case, concerning misfeasance and wrongful trading.

    <i>Re Brian D Pierson (Contractors) Ltd</i>

    Re Brian D Pierson (Contractors) Ltd [1999] BCC 26 is a UK insolvency law and company law case, concerning misfeasance and wrongful trading.

    Re Hydrodan (Corby) Ltd [1994] 2 BCLC 180 is a UK company law case, concerning the meaning of a shadow director. It is sometimes incorrectly cited in sources as Re: Hydrodam.

    <i>Oldham v Kyrris</i>

    Oldham v Kyrris[2003] EWCA Civ 1506 is a UK insolvency law case concerning the administration procedure when a company is unable to repay its debts.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Cayman Islands bankruptcy law</span>

    Cayman Islands bankruptcy law is principally codified in five statutes and statutory instruments:

    Provisional liquidation is a process which exists as part of the corporate insolvency laws of a number of common law jurisdictions whereby after the lodging of a petition for the winding-up of a company by the court, but before the court hears and determines the petition, the court may appoint a liquidator on a "provisional" basis. Unlike a conventional liquidator, a provisional liquidator does not assess claims against the company or try to distribute the company's assets to creditors, as the power to realise the assets comes after the court orders a liquidation.

    <i>Brooks v Armstrong</i>

    Brooks v Armstrong[2016] EWHC 2289 (Ch), [2016] All ER (D) 117 (Nov) is a UK insolvency law case on wrongful trading under section 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

    <i>Re MC Bacon Ltd</i> (No 2)

    Re MC Bacon Ltd [1991] Ch 127 is a UK insolvency law case relating specifically to the recovery the legal costs of the liquidator in relation to an application to set aside a floating charge as an unfair preference.