Smailes & Anor v McNally & Ors

Smailes & Anor v McNally & Ors

The liquidators did not breach the 7th June unless order because they conducted a reasonable search for relevant documents, served compliant lists using an agreed electronic disclosure methodology, and any omissions were innocent, promptly remedied, and did not indicate bad faith or unreasonable search. The lists complied with CPR 31.10 and Practice Direction 31B given the circumstances and party agreement. No strike out or unless order is justified.

Parties
Applicant: Robert Derek Smailes; Applicant: Stephen Blandford Ryman; Applicant: Atrium Training Services Limited (in liquidation); Applicant: Kimberly Scott Services Limited (in liquidation); Applicant: Connor Williams Limited (in liquidation); Respondent: John McNally; Respondent: George MacLean; Respondent: John Alston Dick; Respondent: Pamella McNally; Respondent: Veronica MacLean; Respondent: Tara Birch (nee McNally); Respondent: Paul McNally; Respondent: David MacLean; Respondent: Caroline MacLean; Respondent: Tracey Williams
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Company/insolvency / Interlocutory Application (disclosure Compliance/unless Order)
Outcome
applications for strike out and unless orders dismissed; liquidators not in breach; actions remain in being
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Unless Orders, Relief From Sanctions, Fraudulent Trading, Trading While Insolvent
Civil Procedure Insolvency Company Law Disclosure Unless Orders Relief From Sanctions Fraudulent Trading Trading While Insolvent

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Derek Smailes

Applicant

Stephen Blandford Ryman

Applicant

Atrium Training Services Limited (in liquidation)

Applicant

Kimberly Scott Services Limited (in liquidation)

Applicant

Connor Williams Limited (in liquidation)

Applicant

John McNally

Respondent

George MacLean

Respondent

John Alston Dick

Respondent

Pamella McNally

Respondent

Veronica MacLean

Respondent

Tara Birch (nee McNally)

Respondent

Paul McNally

Respondent

David MacLean

Respondent

Caroline MacLean

Respondent

Tracey Williams

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Company/insolvency / Interlocutory Application (disclosure Compliance/unless Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the liquidators breached the unless order for disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the disclosure lists complied with CPR 31.10 and Practice Direction 31B
  3. 3 Whether missing documents and list deficiencies justified strike out or unless orders

Ratio Decidendi

The liquidators did not breach the 7th June unless order because they conducted a reasonable search for relevant documents, served compliant lists using an agreed electronic disclosure methodology, and any omissions were innocent, promptly remedied, and did not indicate bad faith or unreasonable search. The lists complied with CPR 31.10 and Practice Direction 31B given the circumstances and party agreement. No strike out or unless order is justified.

Court Disposition

applications for strike out and unless orders dismissed; liquidators not in breach; actions remain in being

Orders

  • Liquidators declared not in breach of 7th June order
  • Atrium action not struck out; remains in being