Advocate General for Scotland v Reilly & Anor [2011] ScotCS CSOH_141 (19 August 2011)
The court held that Aqua Seal IT Ltd went into insolvent liquidation, Aquaseal UK Ltd was a prohibited name, the first defender was a director of both companies within the relevant period without leave of the court, and the debts claimed were established and unpaid. The first defender's arguments did not raise any defence that could succeed at proof. Summary decree was granted in terms of conclusions 4 to 8.
- Citation
- [2011] ScotCS CSOH_141
- Parties
- Pursuer: Advocate General for Scotland for and on behalf of the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs; First Defender: Thomas Reilly; Second Defender: Stephen Reilly
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 19 August 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Motion for Summary Decree
- Outcome
- summary decree granted in terms of conclusions 4 to 8; first defender's pleas-in-law repelled to that extent
- Legal Topics
- Director Liability, Prohibited Company Names, Personal Liability for Company Debts, Summary Decree
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Advocate General for Scotland for and on behalf of the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Pursuer
Thomas Reilly
First Defender
Stephen Reilly
Second Defender
Procedural Posture
Civil / Motion for Summary Decree
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Aqua Seal IT Ltd went into insolvent liquidation
- 2 Whether Aquaseal UK Ltd is a prohibited name under Insolvency Act 1986 s.216
- 3 Whether the first defender is personally liable for debts of Aquaseal UK Ltd under s.217
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that Aqua Seal IT Ltd went into insolvent liquidation, Aquaseal UK Ltd was a prohibited name, the first defender was a director of both companies within the relevant period without leave of the court, and the debts claimed were established and unpaid. The first defender's arguments did not raise any defence that could succeed at proof. Summary decree was granted in terms of conclusions 4 to 8.
Court Disposition
summary decree granted in terms of conclusions 4 to 8; first defender's pleas-in-law repelled to that extent
Orders
- summary decree for payment of sums concluded for in conclusions 4 to 8
- matter of expenses put out by order for discussion
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment