Legal Update

Click here to subscribe to Waterstone’s Legal Update


Company financial reporting requirements significantly relaxed? But some directors still can’t get it right? (18 May 2016)

The High Court has recently had its first opportunity to consider liability of directors for failures pursuant to the new financial reporting obligations of a company.


Are untruthful statements to a liquidator immune from civil action? (20 October 2015)

Liquidators often interview a wide range of people under oath, pursuant to s 261 of the Companies Act 1993.

A recent decision of the High Court examines whether those who are untruthful at those interviews can be pursued for the damage caused by those untruthful statements.


Parent company responsible for its subsidiary’s debts (2 March 2015)

The High Court has held a parent company liable for the debts of its subsidiary.

This case highlights the importance of maintaining the independence of subsidiary companies from their parents.


Supreme Court puts a lid on the voidable transaction regime (27 February 2015)

Supreme Court has released a decision that has a significant impact on the voidable transaction regime.

As a result we expect to see significantly less voidable transactions being pursued.


Partly secured creditors at risk of claw back from liquidators (5 February 2015)

The High Court has recently given a decision that emphasises the risks that secured creditors face under the voidable transaction regime. However, it appears that a secured creditor will only face a claw back when the value of the security is less than the amount that they are owed.


Supreme Court disagrees that IRD have super priority (11 November 2014)

The Supreme Court has overturned a decision of the Court of Appeal deciding that when a company is liquidated, any debt owed to the IRD ranks in accordance with the Companies Act 1993 and confirming that the IRD does not have the ability to claim a super preference.


Is a shortcut to debt recovery for voidable transactions okay?
Court of Appeal says yes! (9 April 2014)

The Court of Appeal has recently overturned a decision of the High Court. The Court of Appeal has held that liquidators may avoid substantive Court proceedings and issue a statutory demand for automatically set aside transactions.


Can a creditor position itself to evade the voidable transaction regime? Apparently so… (9 April 2014)

The High Court has held that secured creditors are not outside of the voidable transaction regime. The High Court also held that creditors are able to compromise in such a way to knowingly avoid being caught by the voidable transaction provisions.


Has the value of D&O insurance diminished? (5 February 2014)

The Supreme Court has released a landmark decision that may affect Directors and Officers Insurance. Are you covered? Maybe not…