Scotland: corporate insolvency

Acknowledging the importance of Scottish insolvency law to our customers we have developed a set of content on Scottish insolvency law for Scottish practitioners. The content provides an essential resource for Scottish practitioners while the guidance about the differences between insolvency law in Scotland and England and Wales will assist practitioners in England and Wales in cross-border transactions where it is necessary to have an understanding of insolvency law in Scotland.

Scotland toolkit

The Scotland toolkit is a research tool collating guidance on key areas of law that are specifically relevant to Scotland. The toolkit brings together Scots-law content from across a number of practice areas and includes links to Practice Notes, Checklists and Q&As as well as legal articles and analysis on legal issues directly affecting Scotland. See: Scotland toolkit.

The experts and market standard

The scope and content of the Scottish insolvency law topic is being developed in collaboration with leading experts in Scottish insolvency practice:

  1. David Menzies of ICAS (Institute of Chartered Accountants Scotland)

  2. Tim Cooper of Addleshaw Goddard LLP

  3. James Lloyd of Harper Macleod LLP

  4. Eileen Maclean of Insolvency

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

Commercial Court gives guidance on pleading and proving claims under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The Commercial Court dismissed a claim under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) that the first defendant (Mr El-Husseini) had transferred valuable assets to eight transferee defendants, being his family members, companies under their control and a discretionary trust, with the purpose of putting the assets beyond reach of the claimant (Invest Bank) as a potential creditor. The court held that the allegations advanced at trial were of serious wrongdoing amounting to dishonest behaviour or disreputable conduct which accordingly required a clear pleading of a sufficiently cogent case. Invest Bank had not properly pleaded in its particulars of claim the primary facts on which it sought to rely at trial in raising its case based on inference against the defendants. A positive case as to the financial difficulties of one of the key companies was only raised in a reply to the defence of one of the eight defendants. In any event, without expert accountancy evidence as to the state of finances of the key companies the court could not draw any inferences as to Mr El-Husseini’s purpose. The court also declined to draw adverse inferences from Mr El-Husseini’s failure to participate in the proceedings after a failed jurisdiction challenge, and he gave guidance on the law and practice in that regard. Written by Tiffany Scott KC, barrister at Wilberforce Chambers.

View Restructuring & Insolvency by content type :

Popular documents