Davy v Pickering & Ors [2015] EWHC 380 (Ch) (19 February 2015)

Davy v Pickering & Ors [2015] EWHC 380 (Ch) (19 February 2015)

The court granted both the Limitation Direction and the Petition Direction, holding that justice required restoring Mr Davy's lost opportunity to bring a claim and to petition for winding up, as the company's dissolution without proper notice deprived him of these rights. The directions were justified to place the parties as nearly as possible in the position they would have been in had the company not been dissolved.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 380 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Graham Frank Davy; 1st Defendant: Brian Michael Pickering; 2nd Defendant: Ann Dolores Pickering; 3rd Defendant: The Registrar of Companies; 4th Defendant: 1000654 Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (restoration of Company) / Post Restoration, Application for Consequential Directions
Outcome
Directions granted
Legal Topics
Restoration of Dissolved Company, Limitation Periods, Transaction Avoidance, Winding Up, Creditors' Rights
Company Law Insolvency Law Limitation Law Restoration of Dissolved Company Limitation Periods Transaction Avoidance Winding Up Creditors' Rights

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Graham Frank Davy

Claimant

Brian Michael Pickering

1st Defendant

Ann Dolores Pickering

2nd Defendant

The Registrar of Companies

3rd Defendant

1000654 Limited

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (restoration of Company) / Post Restoration, Application for Consequential Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant a direction that the period between striking off and restoration does not count for limitation purposes
  2. 2 Whether to grant a direction deeming a winding-up petition as presented on the date of dissolution

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted both the Limitation Direction and the Petition Direction, holding that justice required restoring Mr Davy's lost opportunity to bring a claim and to petition for winding up, as the company's dissolution without proper notice deprived him of these rights. The directions were justified to place the parties as nearly as possible in the position they would have been in had the company not been dissolved.

Court Disposition

Directions granted

Orders

  • Direction that the period between striking off and restoration is not to count for limitation purposes for proceedings against the company.
  • Direction that if the claimant petitions for winding up within 14 days, the petition shall be deemed presented on 20 March 2012.