Maud v Aabar Block S.a.r.L Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S.a.r.L. [2016] EWHC 2175 (Ch) (08 September 2016)

Maud v Aabar Block S.a.r.L Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S.a.r.L. [2016] EWHC 2175 (Ch) (08 September 2016)

The court held that, notwithstanding the petitioning creditors' partial admission of an ulterior motive, there was insufficient evidence to establish that the bankruptcy petition was an abuse of process or that an adjournment was warranted. The court found no reasonable prospect of payment to creditors within a reasonable time, given the uncertainties and delays in the Spanish insolvency proceedings and the withdrawal of the Consortium Bid. The bankruptcy order was therefore upheld.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2175 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant/debtor: Glenn Maud; First Respondent/petitioner: Aabar Block S.a.r.l; Second Respondent/petitioner: Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S.a.r.l.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal Against Bankruptcy Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; bankruptcy order upheld
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process in Bankruptcy, Ulterior Purpose in Insolvency Petitions, Adjournment of Bankruptcy Petitions, Creditor Class Interests, Pre Emption Rights in Company Articles
Insolvency Bankruptcy Company Law Abuse of Process in Bankruptcy Ulterior Purpose in Insolvency Petitions Adjournment of Bankruptcy Petitions Creditor Class Interests Pre Emption Rights in Company Articles

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glenn Maud

Appellant/debtor

Aabar Block S.a.r.l

First Respondent/petitioner

Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S.a.r.l.

Second Respondent/petitioner

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal Against Bankruptcy Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the bankruptcy petition was pursued for an ulterior or collateral purpose
  2. 2 Whether the petitioning creditors' motives constituted an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether an adjournment of the bankruptcy petition was appropriate in the interests of the creditor class

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, notwithstanding the petitioning creditors' partial admission of an ulterior motive, there was insufficient evidence to establish that the bankruptcy petition was an abuse of process or that an adjournment was warranted. The court found no reasonable prospect of payment to creditors within a reasonable time, given the uncertainties and delays in the Spanish insolvency proceedings and the withdrawal of the Consortium Bid. The bankruptcy order was therefore upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; bankruptcy order upheld

Orders

  • Bankruptcy order against Mr. Glenn Maud to stand
  • Stay on bankruptcy order lifted