Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S.A.R.L. & Anor v Maud [2020] EWHC 974 (Ch) (24 April 2020)

Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S.A.R.L. & Anor v Maud [2020] EWHC 974 (Ch) (24 April 2020)

The clear weight and rationality of creditor views, combined with absence of any credible prospect of payment or benefit from further adjournment, require a bankruptcy order to be made against Glenn Maud on the LIA Petition. Edgeworth's motives do not constitute abuse of process, and its claims are not extinguished by Article 97.2 or by the application of proceeds from Shareholder Loans.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 974 (Ch)
Parties
Petitioner: Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S. A. R. L.; Petitioner: The Libyan Investment Authority; Respondent: Glenn Maud; Supporting Creditor: Navarro Ventures S. A. R. L.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition / Final Judgment
Outcome
bankruptcy order made against Glenn Maud on LIA Petition
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Class Remedy, Creditor Interests, Personal Guarantee, Security Interests, Statutory Demand, Adjournment Discretion
Insolvency Bankruptcy Commercial Law Abuse of Process Class Remedy Creditor Interests Personal Guarantee Security Interests +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S. A. R. L.

Petitioner

The Libyan Investment Authority

Petitioner

Glenn Maud

Respondent

Navarro Ventures S. A. R. L.

Supporting Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether bankruptcy order should be made against Glenn Maud on petitions by Edgeworth and LIA
  2. 2 Whether Edgeworth's petition constitutes abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether further adjournment would benefit creditors

Ratio Decidendi

The clear weight and rationality of creditor views, combined with absence of any credible prospect of payment or benefit from further adjournment, require a bankruptcy order to be made against Glenn Maud on the LIA Petition. Edgeworth's motives do not constitute abuse of process, and its claims are not extinguished by Article 97.2 or by the application of proceeds from Shareholder Loans.

Court Disposition

bankruptcy order made against Glenn Maud on LIA Petition

Orders

  • Bankruptcy order against Glenn Maud on LIA Petition
  • Receivers entitled to payment of sums from Shareholder Loans