147:
In bankruptcy this is achieved by the relation of the trustee's title to the bankrupt's assets back to the commencement of the bankruptcy. In a company's compulsory winding up it is achieved by section 227. There may be occasions, however, when it would be beneficial, not only for the company but also for its unsecured creditors, that the company should be enabled to dispose of some of its property during the period after the petition has been presented but before a winding up order has been made. An obvious example is if the company has an opportunity by acting speedily to dispose of some piece of property at an exceptionally good price. Many applications for validation under the section relate to specific transactions of this kind or analogous kinds. It may sometimes be beneficial to the company and its creditors that the company should be enabled to complete a particular contract or project, or to continue to carry on its business generally in its ordinary course with a view to a sale of the business as a going concern. In any such case the court has power under section 227 of the
Companies Act 1948 to validate the particular transaction, or the completion of the particular contract or project, or the continuance of the company's business in its ordinary course, as the case may be. In considering whether to make a validating order the court must always, in my opinion, do its best to ensure that the interests of the unsecured creditors will not be prejudiced. Where the application relates to a specific transaction this may be susceptible of positive proof. In a case of completion of a contract or project the proof may perhaps be less positive but nevertheless be cogent enough to satisfy the court that in the interests of the creditors the company should be enabled to proceed, or at any rate that proceeding in the manner proposed would not prejudice them in any respect. The desirability of the company being enabled to carry on its business generally is likely to be more speculative and will be likely to depend on whether a sale of the business as a going concern will probably be more beneficial than a break-up realisation of the company's assets. In each case, I think, the court must necessarily carry out a balancing exercise of the kind envisaged by Templeman J. in his judgment. Each case must depend upon its own particular facts.
162:
preclude an anticipatory application; or the beneficial character of the transaction may be so obvious that there is no real prospect of a liquidator seeking to set it aside, so that an application to the court would waste time, money and effort. But in any case in which the transaction is carried out without an anticipatory validating order the disponee is at risk of the court declining to validate the transaction. It follows, in my view, that the parties when entering into the transaction, if they are aware that it is liable to be invalidated by the section, should have in mind the sort of considerations which would influence the court's decision. A disposition carried out in good faith in the ordinary course of business at a time when the parties are unaware that a petition has been presented may, it seems, normally be validated by the court (see
238:
compulsory liquidation of the company. If that case was rightly decided, as I trust that it was, the court can in appropriate circumstances validate payment in full of an unsecured pre-liquidation debt which constitutes a necessary part of a transaction which as a whole is beneficial to the general body of unsecured creditors. But we have been referred to no case in which the court has validated payment in full of an unsecured pre-liquidation debt where there was no such special circumstance, and in my opinion it would not normally be right to do so, because such a payment would prefer the creditor whose debt is paid over the other creditors of equal degree.
151:
at the expense of other creditors, who will only receive a dividend, in the absence of special circumstances making such a course desirable in the interests of the unsecured creditors as a body. If, for example, it were in the interests of the creditors generally that the company's business should be carried on, and this could only be achieved by paying for goods already supplied to the company when the petition is presented but not yet paid for, the court might think fit in the exercise of its discretion to validate payment for those goods.
213:
Such a transaction involves no dissipation of the company's assets, for it does not reduce the value of those assets. It cannot harm the creditors and there would seem to be no reason why the court should not in the exercise of its discretion validate it. A fortiori, the court would be inclined to validate a transaction which would increase or has increased, the value of the company's assets, or which would preserve, or has preserved, the value of the company's assets from harm which would result from the company's business being paralysed:
158:, the third party can decline to do so until the company has obtained a validating order, or it might itself seek a validating order, or it can enter into the transaction in anticipation of the court making a retroactive validating order at a later date. In the present case the bank adopted the last course. A third party who does that takes the risk of the court refusing to make the order.
39:
180:(1874) L.R. 9 Ch.App. 511, 512) unless there is any ground for thinking that the transaction may involve an attempt to prefer the disponee, in which case the transaction would probably not be validated. In a number of cases reference has been made to the relevance of the policy of ensuring rateable distribution of the assets
150:
Since the policy of the law is to procure so far as practicable rateable payments of the unsecured creditors' claims, it is, in my opinion, clear that the court should not validate any transaction or series of transactions which might result in one or more pre-liquidation creditors being paid in full
146:
It is a basic concept of our law governing the liquidation of insolvent estates, whether in bankruptcy or under the
Companies Acts, that the free assets of the insolvent at the commencement of the liquidation shall be distributed rateably amongst the insolvent's unsecured creditors as at that date.
212:
But although that policy might disincline the court to ratify any transaction which involved preferring a pre-liquidation creditor, it has no relevance to a transaction which is entirely post-liquidation, as for instance a sale of an asset at its full market value after presentation of a petition.
138:
s 227). The court should validate transactions to ensure that unsecured creditors will not be prejudiced, applications for specific transactions have to show proof there will be no prejudice, and the more speculative a transaction is, the more unlikely it should be approved. Applications to court
161:
It may not always be feasible, or desirable, that a validating order should be sought before the transaction in question is carried out. The parties may be unaware at the time when the transaction is entered into that a petition has been presented; or the need for speedy action may be such as to
237:
Ch. 19 the court validated a sale of a lease which was liable to forfeiture in the event of the tenant company being wound up, and also validated, as part of the transaction, payment out of the proceeds of sale of arrears of rent which had accrued before the presentation of the petition for the
110:
Gray's Inn
Construction Co Ltd was a building business, which did a number of small jobs. When one of its creditors, Field-Davis Ltd presented a petition, it was ordered to be wound up by the court. Between the petition date and the court order date, its bank, Natwest
612:
577:
is to make the legal position of the banks operating accounts of companies against whom a winding up petition has been presented rather more complicated than it was under
139:
need not be made if there is a need for speedy action and the beneficial character of the bargain is obvious. Sales of assets for full market value raise no concern.
324:
300:
530:
263:
607:
451:
560:
410:
617:
429:
465:
386:
338:
293:
170:
154:
Where a third party proposes to enter into a transaction with a company which is liable to be invalidated under section 227 of the
202:“I think that in exercising discretion the court must keep in view the evident purpose of the section which, as Chitty J. said in
439:
225:
Ch. 828, where the business of the company was eventually sold as a going concern, presumably to the advantage of the creditors;
204:
188:
182:
176:
505:
286:
194:
233:
227:
221:
246:
75:
215:
164:
522:
489:
374:
350:
261:
was treated as authoritative for many years, but it has now been effectively overruled and superseded by
425:
316:
131:
126:
declined to validate most of the transactions and gave guidance on when they would or would not be
102:
case, concerning the cessation of transactions without court approval after a winding up petition.
155:
17:
516:
130:. He held that all transactions in and out of the bank account were ‘dispositions’ within the
99:
501:
398:
112:
477:
320:
268:
328:
601:
242:
123:
71:
416:
127:
38:
278:
208:, 58 L.T. 220, 221, is to ensure that the creditors are paid pari passu.”
135:
198:
1 W.L.R. 292 . In the last-mentioned case Oliver J. said, at p. 304:
561:"Bank of Ireland -v- Hollicourt (Contracts) Limited Court of Appeal"
115:
branch) allowed it to operate its account. It traded unprofitably.
282:
81:
66:
61:
53:
45:
31:
144:
171:In re Neath Harbour Smelting and Rolling Works
294:
8:
531:Hollicourt (Contracts) Ltd v Bank of Ireland
264:Bank of Ireland v Hollicourt (Contracts) Ltd
87:Voidable preference, undervalue transaction
453:Re Produce Marketing Consortium Ltd (No 2)
301:
287:
279:
37:
28:
613:Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases
412:Phillips v Brewin Dolphin Bell Lawrie Ltd
205:In re Civil Service and General Store Ltd
189:In re Liverpool Civil Service Association
183:In re Civil Service and General Store Ltd
177:In re Liverpool Civil Service Association
543:
142:Buckley LJ's judgment read as follows.
563:. CMS Cameron McKenna. 25 October 2000
7:
466:Re Oasis Merchandising Services Ltd
608:United Kingdom insolvency case law
534:EWCA Civ 263, Ch 555, 1 BCLC 233
387:Arbuthnot Ltd v Havelet Ltd (No 2)
339:Re Parkes Garage (Swadlincote) Ltd
25:
363:Re Gray's Inn Construction Co Ltd
195:In re J. Leslie Engineers Co. Ltd
95:Re Gray's Inn Construction Co Ltd
32:Re Gray’s Inn Construction Co Ltd
18:Re Gray’s Inn Construction Co Ltd
440:Re Anglo-Austrian Printing Union
618:1980 in United Kingdom case law
234:In re A. I. Levy (Holdings) Ltd
228:In re Clifton Place Garage Ltd
1:
222:In re Park Ward & Co. Ltd
269:[2000] EWCA Civ 263
219:(1868) L.R. 3 Ch.App. 443;
168:(1868) L.R. 3 Ch.App. 443;
634:
134:section 127 (at the time,
498:
486:
474:
462:
448:
436:
423:
407:
395:
383:
371:
359:
347:
335:
314:
309:Cases on recouping assets
192:, L.R. 9 Ch.App. 511 and
174:(1887) 56 L.T. 727, 729;
86:
36:
523:Coutts & Co v Stock
216:In re Wiltshire Iron Co
165:In re Wiltshire Iron Co
98:1 WLR 711 is a leading
490:Morphites v Bernasconi
375:Re MC Bacon Ltd (No 1)
351:Re Yeovil Glove Co Ltd
240:
210:
200:
186:(1888) 58 L.T. 220;
426:Insolvency Act 1986
317:Insolvency Act 1986
132:Insolvency Act 1986
156:Companies Act 1948
517:UK insolvency law
512:
511:
506:UK insolvency law
100:UK insolvency law
91:
90:
16:(Redirected from
625:
584:
583:
570:
568:
557:
551:
548:
502:Unlawful trading
454:
413:
399:Re Shoe Lace Ltd
303:
296:
289:
280:
257:The decision in
247:Sir David Cairns
113:Tavistock Square
76:Sir David Cairns
62:Court membership
41:
29:
21:
633:
632:
628:
627:
626:
624:
623:
622:
598:
597:
592:
587:
566:
564:
559:
558:
554:
549:
545:
541:
513:
508:
494:
482:
478:Re Purpoint Ltd
470:
458:
452:
444:
432:
419:
411:
403:
391:
379:
367:
355:
343:
331:
310:
307:
277:
255:
121:
108:
49:Court of Appeal
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
631:
629:
621:
620:
615:
610:
600:
599:
596:
595:
591:
588:
586:
585:
573:The effect of
552:
550:1 WLR 711, 719
542:
540:
537:
536:
535:
527:
519:
510:
509:
499:
496:
495:
487:
484:
483:
475:
472:
471:
463:
460:
459:
449:
446:
445:
437:
434:
433:
424:
421:
420:
408:
405:
404:
396:
393:
392:
384:
381:
380:
372:
369:
368:
360:
357:
356:
348:
345:
344:
336:
333:
332:
315:
312:
311:
308:
306:
305:
298:
291:
283:
276:
273:
254:
251:
120:
117:
107:
104:
89:
88:
84:
83:
79:
78:
68:
67:Judges sitting
64:
63:
59:
58:
55:
51:
50:
47:
43:
42:
34:
33:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
630:
619:
616:
614:
611:
609:
606:
605:
603:
594:
593:
589:
582:
580:
579:re Gray's Inn
576:
562:
556:
553:
547:
544:
538:
533:
532:
528:
525:
524:
520:
518:
515:
514:
507:
503:
497:
492:
491:
485:
480:
479:
473:
468:
467:
461:
456:
455:
447:
442:
441:
435:
431:
427:
422:
418:
415:
414:
406:
401:
400:
394:
389:
388:
382:
377:
376:
370:
365:
364:
358:
353:
352:
346:
341:
340:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
313:
304:
299:
297:
292:
290:
285:
284:
281:
274:
272:
270:
266:
265:
260:
252:
250:
248:
244:
239:
236:
235:
231:Ch. 477 . In
230:
229:
224:
223:
218:
217:
209:
207:
206:
199:
197:
196:
191:
190:
185:
184:
179:
178:
173:
172:
167:
166:
159:
157:
152:
148:
143:
140:
137:
133:
129:
125:
118:
116:
114:
105:
103:
101:
97:
96:
85:
80:
77:
73:
69:
65:
60:
56:
52:
48:
44:
40:
35:
30:
27:
19:
578:
574:
572:
565:. Retrieved
555:
546:
529:
521:
488:
476:
464:
450:
438:
409:
397:
385:
373:
362:
361:
349:
337:
262:
258:
256:
241:
232:
226:
220:
214:
211:
203:
201:
193:
187:
181:
175:
169:
163:
160:
153:
149:
145:
141:
122:
109:
94:
93:
92:
70:Buckley LJ,
26:
249:concurred.
602:Categories
590:References
575:Hollicourt
493:2 WLR 1521
469:2 BCLC 493
402:1 BCLC 111
259:Gray's Inn
124:Buckley LJ
526:1 WLR 906
366:1 WLR 711
57:1 WLR 711
457:BCLC 520
443:2 Ch 891
378:BCLC 324
342:1 Ch 139
275:See also
119:Judgment
82:Keywords
54:Citation
481:BCC 121
430:212-215
325:238-245
253:Comment
243:Goff LJ
136:CA 1948
72:Goff LJ
417:UKHL 2
390:BCC 36
354:Ch 148
567:4 May
539:Notes
267:
106:Facts
46:Court
569:2016
504:and
500:see
245:and
128:void
74:and
428:ss
329:423
321:127
319:ss
604::
571:.
327:,
323:,
271:.
581:.
302:e
295:t
288:v
111:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
