Compulsory liquidation

Compulsory liquidation is the process of winding-up a company by the court. It is most frequently used by a company’s creditors, but it is possible for others—such as the company itself, or members—to also use this process. It is an alternative to voluntary liquidation (both creditors’ voluntary liquidation (CVL) and members’ voluntary liquidation).

The circumstances in which a company can be wound up by the court

By a company’s creditors

A winding-up petition is most commonly issued by a creditor who is owed money and is unable to recover it through the usual debt recovery methods. A creditor may issue a petition on the following grounds:

  1. they have served a statutory demand and the 21-day period for payment/response has expired

  2. they have an enforcement or execution process following a judgment, which is unsatisfied, either in full or in part, or

  3. they are able to prove to the court that the company is unable to pay its debts as and when they fall due, or that the company is balance sheet insolvent—as per the definition of insolvency under the section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986 ( To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Restructuring & Insolvency News

High Court clarifies position of sole directors under Model Articles and the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and in-court appointment of administrators (Re KRF Services (UK) Ltd and others)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: This High Court case (which addresses two important issues in UK company law and sanctions regulations) will be of interest to insolvency practitioners, corporate and restructuring lawyers, sanctions lawyers, and businesses and individuals which are affected by sanctions. Firstly, it clarifies the position of sole directors under the Model Articles for private limited companies. The court ruled that a sole director can validly pass board resolutions and bind the company, regardless of whether they have always been the sole director or were previously part of a multi-member board. This interpretation resolves conflicts between Article 7(2) and Article 11(2) of the Model Articles, with the court favouring Article 7(2)'s provisions. Secondly, the case examines the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and the in-court appointment of administrators. The court determined that making an administration application and order does not breach asset-freezing sanctions, even when the company is designated or controlled by a sanctioned person. While an Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) license is typically required for administrators to act, the court retains discretion to make immediate appointments in urgent situations. Written by Joshua Ray and Duncan Henderson, partners at CANDEY, which acted for the applicants on this matter.

View Restructuring & Insolvency by content type :

Popular documents