A Company (Application To Restrain Advertisement)

A Company (Application To Restrain Advertisement)

On the evidence as it stands, the Petitioner cannot show that the Company would be insolvent under s.123(1)(e) even if coronavirus had not had a financial effect; therefore, there is no real chance of a winding up order being made, and it would be oppressive and unfair to allow advertisement of the petition.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: The Company; Respondent: First Respondent (Petitioner); Respondent: Second Respondent; Respondent: Third Respondent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Insolvency Application / Application to Restrain Advertisement of Winding Up Petition
Outcome
Injunction granted restraining advertisement of the winding up petition until further order; injunctions also granted restraining Second and Third Respondents from presenting petitions until further order, with liberty to apply.
Legal Topics
Winding Up Petitions, Injunctions, Statutory Demands, COVID 19 Legislative Impact
Insolvency Law Company Law Winding Up Petitions Injunctions Statutory Demands COVID 19 Legislative Impact

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Company

Applicant

First Respondent (Petitioner)

Respondent

Second Respondent

Respondent

Third Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Insolvency Application / Application to Restrain Advertisement of Winding Up Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the advertisement of a winding up petition should be restrained in light of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill (CIG Bill) and COVID-19 impact
  2. 2 Whether the petition can proceed under s.123(1)(e) of the Insolvency Act 1986 despite the statutory demand being caught by Schedule 10 of the CIG Bill
  3. 3 Whether the Petitioner had reasonable grounds for believing the debt was due irrespective of COVID-19

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence as it stands, the Petitioner cannot show that the Company would be insolvent under s.123(1)(e) even if coronavirus had not had a financial effect; therefore, there is no real chance of a winding up order being made, and it would be oppressive and unfair to allow advertisement of the petition.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted restraining advertisement of the winding up petition until further order; injunctions also granted restraining Second and Third Respondents from presenting petitions until further order, with liberty to apply.

Orders

  • Injunction restraining advertisement of the winding up petition until further order, subject to cross-undertaking in damages.
  • Injunctions restraining Second and Third Respondents from presenting winding up petitions based on their statutory demands until further order, with liberty to apply.