Representation of Itkin [2023] JRC 089 (23 May 2023)

Representation of Itkin [2023] JRC 089 (23 May 2023)

The Court finds that the Respondents' reliance on funding from Mrs Sabadash, a party in direct dispute with the Representor, undermines their ability to maintain impartiality as liquidators. The appointment process and early involvement of conflicted counsel further taint their position. The Respondents cannot continue in office unless funding arrangements are clarified and shown to be independent. The Court invites further submissions on alternative funding and reserves the right to remove the Respondents if arrangements are inadequate.

Citation
[2023] JRC 089
Parties
Representor: Mr Itkin; Company: Golden Sphinx Limited; Director: Mrs Larissa Sabadash; Shareholder: JTC Services Limited; Shareholder: JTC Nominees Limited; Trustee: JTC Trust Company Limited; Trust: Amber Trust; Liquidators: Respondents (joint liquidators); Counsel: Advocate Jeremy Garrood
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
23 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Removal of Liquidators and Counsel / Judgment
Outcome
Conditional continuation of Respondents as liquidators pending clarification of funding arrangements; no removal at this stage.
Legal Topics
Liquidator Removal, Conflict of Interest, Funding of Liquidation, Creditors' Winding Up
Insolvency Company Law Liquidator Removal Conflict of Interest Funding of Liquidation Creditors' Winding Up

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Itkin

Representor

Golden Sphinx Limited

Company

Mrs Larissa Sabadash

Director

JTC Services Limited

Shareholder

JTC Nominees Limited

Shareholder

JTC Trust Company Limited

Trustee

Amber Trust

Trust

Respondents (joint liquidators)

Liquidators

Advocate Jeremy Garrood

Counsel

Procedural Posture

Application for Removal of Liquidators and Counsel / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Respondents should be removed as liquidators due to conflict of interest and funding arrangements
  2. 2 Whether Advocate Garrood should be prevented from acting for the Company
  3. 3 Whether the liquidation process was conducted impartially

Ratio Decidendi

The Court finds that the Respondents' reliance on funding from Mrs Sabadash, a party in direct dispute with the Representor, undermines their ability to maintain impartiality as liquidators. The appointment process and early involvement of conflicted counsel further taint their position. The Respondents cannot continue in office unless funding arrangements are clarified and shown to be independent. The Court invites further submissions on alternative funding and reserves the right to remove the Respondents if arrangements are inadequate.

Court Disposition

Conditional continuation of Respondents as liquidators pending clarification of funding arrangements; no removal at this stage.

Orders

  • Respondents invited to return to Court with details of progress on alternative funding arrangements for liquidation and litigation.
  • If funding arrangements are inadequate, Court will invite submissions on removal and appointment of new liquidators.