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.
Find up-to-date guidance on points of law and then easily pull up sources to support your advice with Lexis PSL
Check out our straightforward definitions of common legal terms.
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Access our unrivalled global news content, business information and analytics solutions
Insurance, risk and compliance intelligence using big data, proprietary linking and advanced analytics.
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
The court held that a notice of appointment of administrators (NoA) could be filed at court by directors of a company by e-filing outside of court hours and that such filing took effect from the time at which it was filed by the directors (and not at the time at which the court office subsequently opened and processed the documents). Given the various different and inconsistent analyses applied in the earlier case law to this question, this decision goes further than any before in making an unequivocal finding as to an entitlement of directors to appoint administrators in this manner—a decision which puts directors in a superior position to qualifying floating charge holders making out-of-hours, out-of-court appointments. Written by Carly Sandbach, barrister, at Exchange Chambers.
Re Keyworker Homes (North West) Ltd  EWHC 3499 (Ch)
The decision is of enormous significance to insolvency practitioners, those who appoint them and their advisors. In finding an entitlement for directors to appoint administrators by e-filing outside of court hours—and that such appointment takes effect at the time of the filing (and not at the time at which the court office subsequently opened and processed the documents)—the decision goes further than any of the earlier decisions on this question and disagreed with the analyses applied in Re Skeggs Beef Limited  EWHC 2607 (Ch) and Re SJ Henderson and Co Ltd  EWHC 2742 (Ch) in this regard. The effect of the decision is to place directors in a superior position to qualifying floating charge holders making out of hours, out of court appointments, who remain subject to the regime set out in Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016, SI 2016/1024, rules 3.20 to 3.22.
The court further adopted an expansive interpretation to the calculation of ‘ten business days’, finding that in calculating the period of ’ten business days’ referred to in paragraph 28(2) of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), the day upon which the notice of intention to appoint administrators (NoI) was filed, was to be disregarded such that ‘day one’ of the period of ten business days was the working day following the filing of the NoI. This is notwithstanding the wording of IA 1986, Sch B1, para 28(2) which states ‘…after the period of ten business days beginning with the date on which the notice of intention to appoint is filed’. The result is to afford appointors a further day by which to file their NoA, than the way in which that period had commonly (though not universally) previously been calculated.
On 11 October 2019 at 16:29 the directors of the company electronically filed at court a NoI. On 24 October 2019 at 18:00 the directors of the company electronically filed at court a NoA. An e-filing approval notification confirmed the filing had been ‘accepted by the clerk on 24 October 2019 at 06:00 PM’. The NoA was received back on 25 October 2019 having been endorsed as follows: ‘This notice was filed on 25 October 2019 at 10:00AM’.
In light of the recent decisions of Re HMV Ecommerce Ltd  EWHC 903 (Ch), Re Skeggs Beef Limited  EWHC 2607 (Ch) and Re SJ Henderson and Co Ltd  EWHC 2742 (Ch) concerning the validity of e-filing of NoAs out of hours; and separately the provisions of IA 1986, Sch B1, para 28(2) (an appointment of an administrator may not be made by the directors under IA 1986, Sch B1, para 22 after the period of ten business days beginning with the date on which the NoA is filed under IA 1986, Sch B1, para 27(1)) the joint administrators were concerned as to the validity of their appointment. An application was issued seeking declarations as to the validity of their appointment, alternatively relief in respect of any defect in the same.
In view of the various differing analyses provided by the earlier case law, the court was required to determine:
The court held:
Carly Sandbach is a barrister at Exchange Chambers. If you have any questions about membership of LexisPSL’s Case Analysis Expert Panels, please contact email@example.com.
The views expressed by our Legal Analysis interviewees are not necessarily those of the proprietor.
Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK
* denotes a required field
0330 161 1234