Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform v Amway (UK) Ltd

Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform v Amway (UK) Ltd

The Court of Appeal held that the judge correctly exercised his discretion in refusing to wind up Amway (UK) Ltd. The judge was entitled to consider the company's new business model, which addressed the defects of the old model, and to accept undertakings as a condition for refusing the petition, even though the Secretary of State opposed them. The past misconduct, while serious, did not mandate winding up in light of the company's reformed conduct and the absence of ongoing risk. The authorities did not require a winding up in every case of past misconduct, and the balancing exercise was properly conducted.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Respondent/defendant: Amway (UK) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division, Companies Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal on costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Winding Up in the Public Interest, Section 124 a Insolvency Act 1986, Acceptance of Undertakings, Discretion of the Court in Winding Up Petitions, Costs in Public Interest Litigation
Company Law Insolvency Law Regulatory Law Winding Up in the Public Interest Section 124 a Insolvency Act 1986 Acceptance of Undertakings Discretion of the Court in Winding Up Petitions Costs in Public Interest Litigation

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

Parties

Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform

Appellant/claimant

Amway (UK) Ltd

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division, Companies Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court erred in refusing to wind up Amway (UK) Ltd in the public interest under section 124A of the Insolvency Act 1986 despite findings of past misconduct
  2. 2 Whether the court could properly accept undertakings from the company as a condition for refusing the winding up petition, even though the Secretary of State opposed such undertakings
  3. 3 Whether the judge misapplied the relevant legal principles and authorities regarding the exercise of discretion in public interest winding up petitions

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the judge correctly exercised his discretion in refusing to wind up Amway (UK) Ltd. The judge was entitled to consider the company's new business model, which addressed the defects of the old model, and to accept undertakings as a condition for refusing the petition, even though the Secretary of State opposed them. The past misconduct, while serious, did not mandate winding up in light of the company's reformed conduct and the absence of ongoing risk. The authorities did not require a winding up in every case of past misconduct, and the balancing exercise was properly conducted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal on costs dismissed

Orders

  • The judge's order refusing the winding up petition stands.
  • The undertakings offered by Amway (UK) Ltd are accepted as a condition of the order.