Gresham International Ltd & Anor v Moonie & Ors [2009] EWHC 1093 (Ch) (20 May 2009)

Gresham International Ltd & Anor v Moonie & Ors [2009] EWHC 1093 (Ch) (20 May 2009)

The Secretary of State's sanction was ineffective as it was not sought or granted retrospectively and could not be reinterpreted as such. The court has discretion to grant prospective sanction for costs from the date of the application but will not grant retrospective sanction for costs incurred before that date where statutory requirements are not satisfied and no inadvertence or justification is shown. The liquidator is entitled to prospective sanction for costs from 8 December 2008 but not for earlier costs.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 1093 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant: Gresham International Limited (In Liquidation); Applicant: Louise Mary Brittain; Respondent: William Thomas Moonie; Respondent: Myra Moonie; Respondent: Meadow Trading Company Limited; Respondent: Gresham (Gibraltar) Limited; Respondent: Alan Geoffrey Dickinson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Application / Judgment on Applications for Sanction and Indemnity in Liquidation Proceedings
Outcome
Application granted in part, refused in part
Legal Topics
Liquidator's Powers, Sanction for Proceedings, Retrospective Sanction, Indemnity for Costs, Supervisory Powers of the Court
Insolvency Company Law Liquidator's Powers Sanction for Proceedings Retrospective Sanction Indemnity for Costs Supervisory Powers of the Court

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gresham International Limited (In Liquidation)

Applicant

Louise Mary Brittain

Applicant

William Thomas Moonie

Respondent

Myra Moonie

Respondent

Meadow Trading Company Limited

Respondent

Gresham (Gibraltar) Limited

Respondent

Alan Geoffrey Dickinson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Application / Judgment on Applications for Sanction and Indemnity in Liquidation Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State's sanction granted to the liquidator was valid for proceedings already commenced
  2. 2 Whether the court can grant retrospective or prospective sanction for costs in liquidation proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the liquidator is entitled to indemnity out of company assets for costs incurred without prior sanction

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State's sanction was ineffective as it was not sought or granted retrospectively and could not be reinterpreted as such. The court has discretion to grant prospective sanction for costs from the date of the application but will not grant retrospective sanction for costs incurred before that date where statutory requirements are not satisfied and no inadvertence or justification is shown. The liquidator is entitled to prospective sanction for costs from 8 December 2008 but not for earlier costs.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part, refused in part

Orders

  • Prospective sanction granted to the liquidator for all proceedings costs from 8 December 2008
  • Retrospective sanction for costs incurred before 8 December 2008 refused