Papers by Adrian J. Walters
INSOL Europe eBooks, 2009
Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, 2006
Whether we like it or not and whether we actually think it works or not, the Company Directors' D... more Whether we like it or not and whether we actually think it works or not, the Company Directors' Disqualification Act 1986 (CDDA) has proved to be a significant measure in political, cultural and legal terms. Since publication of a National Audit Office Report in 1993 critical of the Insolvency Service's enforcement efforts, there has been a dramatic increase in the volume of disqualification proceedings. The number of disqualification orders made by the courts in disqualification proceedings is now running at in excess of 1,000 per annum. 1 A sharpening of rhetoric has accompanied this increase in activity. The Department of Trade and Industry's (DTI) press releases from the last five years or so use colourful and vigorous language. Here are just a few examples: "
RWS Verlag Kommunikationsforum eBooks, 2009
In a recent issue of Company Lawyer, the present writer discussed changes made to the Company Dir... more In a recent issue of Company Lawyer, the present writer discussed changes made to the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 (CDDA) by the Insolvency Act 2000 that have made it possible for disqualification proceedings to be compromised by offer and acceptance of undertakings without the involvement of the court. 1 It was seen there that the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry's practice is to refuse to accept an undertaking unless the director concerned is prepared to make admissions as to the factual basis of disqualification and agree to the formal recording of the admissions in a schedule to the undertaking. The director is required to make the admissions "solely for the purposes of the [CDDA] and for any other purposes consequential to the giving of a disqualification undertaking". This means that the admissions can only be relied on in future CDDA proceedings 2 or in other contexts where CDDA disqualification has a direct impact. 2 Patten J. upheld the Secretary of State's practice in relation to admissions in Re Blackspur Group pic, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v. Eastaway,-a decision supported by the writer. 5 The appeal from Patten J.'s decision has now been heard. 2 The present article serves to revisit the background to the case and to reflect briefly on the outcome in the Court of Appeal.
Law Quarterly Review, 2003
Land Ltd, a property developer from the State of Victoria, took out a loan with the ANZ Banking G... more Land Ltd, a property developer from the State of Victoria, took out a loan with the ANZ Banking Group secured by a floating charge over its assets. The bank subsequently called in the loan, an event that triggered the automatic crystallisation of the charge, but allowed Thompson to continue trading. Thompson then paid off four contractors using cash and securities that were caught by the crystallised charge. What remained of the bank's security was insufficient to repay the loan in full. Thompson's liquidator sought to recover the payments from the contractors on the ground that they were unlawful preferences under the applicable equivalent *L.
The company lawyer, 2001
*Comp. Law. 290 Following the enactment of the Insolvency Act 2000, directors' disqualification p... more *Comp. Law. 290 Following the enactment of the Insolvency Act 2000, directors' disqualification proceedings can now be settled administratively by the offer and acceptance of undertakings. This article examines the new regime and argues that, unless carefully implemented, it could undermine the overall objectives of the Company Directors' Disqualification Act 1986. In particular, the hope is expressed that the courts will not interpret the legislation as requiring the Secretary of State to accept bare undertakings without any admissions by the director as to the underlying factual basis of disqualification.
Law Quarterly Review, 1996
*Insolv. Int. 58 The purpose of this article is to examine the provisions of r.12.12 of the Insol... more *Insolv. Int. 58 The purpose of this article is to examine the provisions of r.12.12 of the Insolvency Rules, regarding service of insolvency proceedings on parties located in the United States. In a previous article, 1 David Griffiths considered the interaction of r.12.12 and the EC Regulation 1348/2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters, 2 concluding that it would be dangerous to rely on the apparent breadth of the court's discretion in r.12.12(3) as regards mode of service. This article pursues a similar course, but with reference to service of insolvency proceedings in the United States rather than Europe.
The company lawyer, 2004
*Comp. Law. 90 Introduction The question for the House of Lords in Re Pantmaenog Timber Co Ltd, O... more *Comp. Law. 90 Introduction The question for the House of Lords in Re Pantmaenog Timber Co Ltd, Official Receiver v Wadge Rapps and Hunt 1 was whether the powers conferred by s.236 of the Insolvency Act 1986 ("IA") can lawfully be exercised solely or principally to obtain evidence for use in disqualification proceedings under the Company Directors' Disqualification Act 1986 ("CDDA"). It is important to stress that the question was simply one of jurisdiction : on the application of an administrator, administrative receiver, liquidator, provisional liquidator or the official receiver does the court have the power to summon any of the categories of person described in s.236(2) to provide the applicant with information and/or documents where the information and/or documents are required solely or principally in connection with disqualification proceedings that are being contemplated or are already pending?
Nottingham Law Journal, 1999
Uploads
Papers by Adrian J. Walters