BAT Industries Plc v Windward Prospects Ltd

BAT Industries Plc v Windward Prospects Ltd

Justice and convenience require appointment of a receiver to protect Windward's substantial dividend claims, given the real risk of limitation expiry, lack of assurance that protective proceedings will be issued, and minimal prejudice to Windward as a non-trading company.

Parties
Claimant: BAT Industries PLC; Defendant: Windward Prospects Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Appointment of Receiver / Judgment on Application
Legal Topics
Appointment of Receiver, Directors' Duties, Unlawful Dividends, Limitation Periods, Indemnity Claims
Company Law Insolvency Equity Appointment of Receiver Directors' Duties Unlawful Dividends Limitation Periods Indemnity Claims

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BAT Industries PLC

Claimant

Windward Prospects Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Appointment of Receiver / Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a receiver should be appointed to protect Windward's dividend claims against Sequana and its former directors
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of the claims becoming time-barred
  3. 3 Whether the dividends were unlawfully paid in breach of company law and directors' duties

Ratio Decidendi

Justice and convenience require appointment of a receiver to protect Windward's substantial dividend claims, given the real risk of limitation expiry, lack of assurance that protective proceedings will be issued, and minimal prejudice to Windward as a non-trading company.