Case Shows Difficulty of Removing an Administrator
27th January, 2012
If a creditor of an insolvent business believes that their position could be improved by the administrator of the business taking legal action, but the administrator refuses to do so, relations between the administrator and the parties affected by the inaction are likely to be strained.
In a recent case, this is exactly what happened and, because the administrator refused to take proceedings, creditors sought to have him removed and replaced by another. The Insolvency Act 1986 permits this where there is ‘good or sufficient reason’ for doing so. This does not mean that the administrator is unfit to act or is guilty of misconduct, but that the removal of the administrator is in the interests of the majority of the creditors.
In the case in point, the purpose of the proposed legal action was to reduce the creditors’ liability under personal guarantees.
An initial application to remove the administrator was refused and an appeal was made to the Court of Appeal. The Court ruled that if the administrator was unbiased and had reached a decision based on the material before him, then the fact that a different administrator might reach a different conclusion might be a reason to challenge the decision, but not to remove the administrator altogether.
The courts are reluctant to overturn decisions when a professional person has been shown to act impartially and has taken a decision which is within the range of reasonable decisions open to them based on the information available.
The essential lesson to be learned from this case is that the time to make arguments of this nature is early on in the process. Persuading the administrator to take action is more likely to be successful than a subsequent legal challenge after the administrator has decided not to do so.
If you are faced with your interests being affected by the insolvency of another party, we may be able to assist you in negotiations with the insolvency practitioner responsible. Contact Nick Clarke for more details.
You might also be interested in...
6th July, 2018
When a business invests in its community it deserves praise – but it must go beyond that, writes Helen Watson, a trustee at Claire House and partner at Aaron and Partners Solicitors. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the link between a company and the community in which it operates. As a trustee on charity boards including Claire House... Read More »
4th July, 2018
Stuart Haynes, Corporate & Commercial Partner and IAG Global Board Member, reports on IAG Global – Wiesbaden held 14th to 17th June 2018 Stuart Haynes (IAG Global Board Member) Stuart Scott-Goldstone and Nick Clarke attended the recent IAG Global meeting in Wiesbaden which was held at the Grand Hotel Nassauer Hof from 14th – and 17th July 2018 The meeting... Read More »
6th June, 2018
Rhiannon Edwards, Solicitor in the Wills, Trusts and Tax department, discusses the recent judgement in the case of Nield-Moir v Freeman, where the High Court has ordered one of two daughters of Colin Birtles, who has died, to take a DNA test to prove paternity as part of an inheritance dispute In an unusual case, the High Court... Read More »