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
Printer Friendly Version
What can liquidators learn from Re Powertrain Ltd (in liquidation)? Tina Kyriakides of Radcliffe Chambers examines this recent judgment, in which the court was asked to sanction a proposed distribution to creditors against the backdrop of potential future product liability claims.
Re Powertrain Ltd (in Liquidation)  Lexis Citation 308,  All ER (D) 48 (Jan)
The Chancery Division held that, on the facts, there was a strong case for liquidators of a company in creditors’ voluntary liquidation proceeding to make distributions without regard to product liability claims that might emerge in the future. The liquidators were also granted relief under section 1157(2) of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006).
Powertrain Ltd (Powertrain) was part of the MG Rover Group. It carried on business in the design, manufacture and sale of engines and gear boxes. Powertrain went into administration on 8 April 2005. On 22 July 2005, the administrators entered into a contract of sale for the sale to Nanjing Automobile (Group) Corporation of the majority of Powertrain’s assets. Although Powertrain’s activities were curtailed at that point, it continued to effect sales until February 2006. On 20 March 2006, it went into creditors’ voluntary liquidation.
The liquidators reached a position whereby they did not expect to make any further realisations of significance other than the possible receipt of dividends on Powertrain’s claims made in the liquidation of the MG Rover Group. The liquidators held a balance of funds of £10.5m and wanted to distribute these funds to the company’s creditors. However, they were concerned about potential product liability claims that might later be made in respect of products sold between the date of administration and February 2006, when Powertrain ceased trading. The liquidators accordingly wanted to know whether they could distribute the whole of the funds in their hands to the then known creditors. If they could, they also wanted to ensure they were protected from personal liability towards contingent creditors who might later make claims.
The judge had to decide two issues:
There were in essence two legal points that the court had to consider:
On the first issue, the judge decided an order should be made permitting the liquidators to declare and pay dividends without making provision for the possibility of unknown future product liability claims, subject to certain provisos. The judgment does not state what those provisos were, but it is assumed that they related to creditors who might notify the liquidators a claim prior to the distribution being made.
On the second issue, the judge decided that the liquidators were clearly officers falling within CA 2006, s 1157 and made an order granting relief to the liquidators under that section.
On the first issue, the judge examined the evidence in order to assess the prospect of product liability claims being made in the future. The evidence was that Powertrain had ceased to trade for more than nine years. As at the date of the hearing, no proofs had been lodged in Powertrain’s liquidation or otherwise notified to its office-holders in respect of product liability claims. No notifications had been made against the wider group of companies relating to post-appointment supplies, which could potentially give rise to expense liabilities. None of the 120 product liability claims that had been made under the group’s insurance policy since 2000 had been made against Powertrain itself. Of the 93 claims that had not been settled, only 36 could, on their face at least, relate to Powertrain products, and all of those both related to events before administration and appeared to have been abandoned or to have become dormant. None of the 27 claims that had been settled by a member of the group or its insurers had been attributed to Powertrain.
Having regard to the above matters and to the lapse of time, which would have given rise to limitation issues in any event, the court held that the chances of product liability claims being made were remote. Further, the court held that creditors had already been kept out of the money in the liquidators’ hands for a considerable period of time. In these circumstances, the court decided that the balance to be struck between paying known creditors sooner rather than later and the injustice of leaving other creditors with no remedy lay strongly in favour of the liquidators making a distribution to the known creditors.
On the second issue, the court held that all that ‘officer’ meant in CA 2006, s 1157 was someone who held an office in relation to a company. In support of this, the court relied, in particular, on the case of Re Home Treat Ltd  BCC 165.
If a liquidator wishes to make a distribution, but there is a possibility of further claims being made in the liquidation, the liquidator should not do anything without first making an application for directions to the court. In order to protect the liquidator, this should be coupled with an application under CA 2006, s 1157, in the event that the court authorises a distribution to be made.
Each case will, however, depend on its facts. For example, in the case of Re R-R Realisations Ltd (formerly Rolls-Royce Ltd)  1 All ER 1019, the court refused to give permission to liquidators of the company to distribute the remaining assets to the members of the company when they had received claims, albeit very late, arising out of an aircraft accident. In Re R-R Realisations, the court found that it would be unjust to allow the distribution and to deprive these creditors of making an effective claim against the company. The court was also influenced by the fact that the proposed distribution was to be made to the company’s members. It held that a court would be more reluctant to facilitate a distribution among members than it would if the distribution were to be to creditors.
Tina Kyriakides has a strong practice in general commercial and chancery litigation and advisory work that covers company law, corporate and personal insolvency, contract, commercial fraud, lending and other finance transactions, mortgages, guarantees and other securities. She is consultant editor of Corporate Recovery & Insolvency, published by Butterworths and has authored various LexisPSL Restructuring and Insolvency practice notes on individual voluntary arrangements and company voluntary arrangements.
Interviewed by Barbara Bergin.
The views expressed by our Legal Analysis interviewees are not necessarily those of the proprietor.
If you are a LexisPSL subscriber, click the link below for further information:
Trading a company in administration—the office-holder's point of view
What counts as an expense?
Not a subscriber? Find out more about how LexisPSL can help you and click here for a free trial of LexisPSL Restructuring and Insolvency.
First published on LexisPSL Restructuring and Insolvency
0330 161 1234