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
Does a trustee have a common law duty of care to the bankrupt? John Briggs, barrister at South Square, clarifies the legal position following the decision in Oraki and another v Bramston and another.
Oraki and another v Bramston and another  EWHC 2046 (Ch),  All ER (D) 175 (Jul)
The claimant former bankrupts brought a claim alleging that the defendant trustees had failed to do their job properly and that they had mismanaged their estates, thereby causing them loss and damage. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the claim, held that a surplus in the bankrupt’s estate did not give rise to a duty in the tort of negligence on the trustee’s part to the bankrupt. A trustee did not owe a bankrupt a duty at common law outside of section 304 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) and, further, it was not part of the trustee’s role to review the legitimacy of a judgment affecting a bankrupt, which directly or indirectly had been subject to appeals which had been rejected.
Dr Oraki and her husband (the Orakis) had been made bankrupt in 2005/06. Many years later, in January 2013, their bankruptcies were annulled pursuant to IA 1986, s 282(1)(a) due to serious irregularities in relation to the judgment and the debt on which they had been made bankrupt.
The judgment in favour of the solicitors whom the Orakis had instructed was for damages to be assessed in what was an action for debt. There was no itemised bill and no power under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, SI 1998/3132, r 24 to order a payment on account.
The Orakis claimed that the first and second trustees in bankruptcy (the trustee) had failed expeditiously to bring their bankruptcies to an end and had mismanaged their properties causing them and their estates
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