Q&As

When does notice need to be served if you intend to use the exception to rule 4.228(1) in any relation to the Insolvency Act 1986, s 216 concerning prohibited names?

read titleRead full title
Published on LexisPSL on 15/06/2016

The following Restructuring & Insolvency Q&A provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • When does notice need to be served if you intend to use the exception to rule 4.228(1) in any relation to the Insolvency Act 1986, s 216 concerning prohibited names?

When does notice need to be served if you intend to use the exception to rule 4.228(1) in any relation to the Insolvency Act 1986, s 216 concerning prohibited names?

STOP PRESS: From 6 April 2017, the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 were revoked and replaced by the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024. The content in this Q&A may have been affected by this change.

Rule 4.228 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 (IR 1986), SI 1986/1925 permits a director of an insolvent company to act as a director of a new company with a prohibited name provided that the business of the insolvent company has been acquired under arrangements made by an insolvency practitioner and notice has been given to the creditors of the insolvent company.

The new notice procedure in SI 1986/1925, rule 4.228, as amended on 6 August 2007, allows notice to be served after the old company is in liquidation in certain circumstances.

Detailed commentary on the application for this rule can be found in Mithani: Directors' Disqualification at The present rule 4.228—arrangements completed on or after 6 August 2007, a summary of which is set out below.

  1. It is not possible to serve a valid notice where the successor company purchases the business from the liquidator of the old company, and the director of the old company who seeks

Related documents:

Popular documents