Table of contents
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Article summary
Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: This decision is the latest to consider what happens when administrators apply their commercial judgement, rather than what the insolvency legislation prescribes. After a thorough review of the authorities and legislation, the court essentially held that: (i) administrators who seek approval of their proposals from an informal committee of creditors holding over 50% of the debt will nevertheless be validly appointed; and (ii) a failure to comply with some of the shorter deadlines surrounding the requisitioning of, and calculation of votes at, creditors’ meetings will likely be remediable defects. As a counterbalance to the reminder to office-holders that they should check what the legislation requires, the decision also stands as a reminder that a pragmatic approach should be taken in relation to applications that, in effect, seek retrospective validation of a state of affairs that no longer exist. Written by Samuel Parsons, barrister at Guildhall Chambers.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial