Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
Following on from our blog post: Court of Appeal dismisses appeal in IPO case, Simon Passfield, specialist insolvency barrister at Guildhall Chambers, examines the Court of Appeal’s judgment in Horton v Henry and discusses what it means for bankrupt pension holders and their creditors, as well as practitioners.
Horton (as trustee in bankruptcy of Michael Gerard Henry) v Henry  EWCA Civ 989,  All ER (D) 50 (Oct)
The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the trustee in bankruptcy’s appeal, thus holding, that section 333(1) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), read in conjunction with IA 1986, s 310, did not enable a trustee in bankruptcy to require a bankrupt, who had reached the age at which he was contractually entitled to draw down or ‘crystallise’ his pension (but had not done so), to elect to do so, so that the trustee might apply for an income payments order, under IA 1986, s 310, in relation to the funds drawn, or to be drawn, down. Since rights under registered personal pension schemes no longer formed part of the bankrupt’s estate which vested in the trustee, in the absence of express statutory language conferring such a power, there was no basis for concluding that the court had power to require a bankrupt to exercise his options in any particular way.
In Raithatha v Williamson (a bankrupt)  EWHC 909 (Ch),  All ER (D) 57 (Apr), Bernard Livesey QC held that the court could make an income payments order (IPO) in respect of a bankrupt who, having reached the age of 55, was entitled (but had not yet elected) to draw down his pension, on the basis that he had ‘become entitled’ to the income from the pension for the purposes of IA 1986, s 310(7). That decision was considered to be controversial
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
Stephen qualified as a solicitor in 2005 and joined the Restructuring and Insolvency team at Lexis®PSL in September 2014 from Shoosmiths LLP, where he was a senior associate in the restructuring and insolvency team.
Primarily focused on contentious and advisory corporate and personal insolvency work, Stephen’s experience includes acting for office-holders on a wide range of issues, including appointments, investigations and the recovery and realisation of assets (including antecedent transaction claims), and for creditors in respect of the impact on them of the insolvency of debtors and counterparties.
0330 161 1234