Chester 01244 405555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

Shrewsbury 01743 443 043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ
DX: 148563 Shrewsbury 14

Manchester 0844 800 8346

Pall Mall Court
61-67 King Street
Manchester M2 4PD

Send us a message
Our Offices

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...

Experienced HR leader joins Aaron & Partners LLP

15th May, 2018

Experienced HR leader joins Aaron & Partners LLP Law firm with offices in Chester and Shrewsbury appoints Kate Robertson to drive HR strategy for more than 120 staff and to support the company’s growth Chester law firm Aaron & Partners LLP has strengthened its senior leadership team with the appointment of an experienced human resources manager. Kate Robertson... Read More »

When you should NOT pay the bailiff…

24th April, 2018

Jan Chillery, Insolvency Partner at Aaron & Partners LLP, shares her experience and the reasons why we should be cautious before paying so-called “bailiffs” over the phone or online without vetting them first. My neighbour has told me that recently he had a CCJ (County Court Judgment) against him. A day or so later, he received a phone call... Read More »

Employee awarded 15 years back-pay

11th April, 2018

Jan Chillery, Insolvency Partner comments on the recent case of Mr A M Coletta v Bath Hill Court – Bournemouth Property Management Ltd UKEAT 0200 17 RN To read the Transcript of Proceedings in full please click here “This case highlights an important aspect of the Statute of Limitations which affects a wider field than employment claims. An... Read More »

Contact Us