Linden Ife

Bank succeeded on repayment claim despite claims for collateral contract, misrepresentation, rectification, and for adverse construction of subordination agreement and deed of priority.

Payment by petitioning creditor of trustee’s fees and expenses following annulment of bankruptcy order.

Judge required payment into court as a condition of obtaining an injunction to restrain advertisement of winding-up petition.

Employer’s entitlement to injunction to enforce post-termination contractual restriction.

Application by company for permission to apply to enforce delivery up of equipment from company which had filed notice of intention to appoint administrator.

Company director had acted in breach of fiduciary duty in setting up his own company and entering into a contract he had been negotiating on behalf of his employer. A third party, and the new company, were liable in tort for procuring a breach of contract and for unlawful means conspiracy, and for dishonest assistance.

In assessing the quantum of equitable compensation and contractual damages arising from the loss of opportunity to enter into a contract, the fact that the defendant had made a loss from the contract did not mean, of itself, that the contract was not profitable.

To qualify as a "security financial collateral arrangement" under the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No.2) Regulations 2003 reg.3, the financial collateral had to be "in the possession or under the control of the collateral-taker"; for that purpose, "control" meant the legal right to control the collateral and not simply administrative control.

Claim for wrongful interference with electronic goods, involving dispute about title and seller in possession.

Where a joint administrator had been so closely involved with the negotiations of a pre-pack contract for the sale of a firm of solicitors' work in progress retainer, the court exercised its powers of removal under the Insolvency Act 1986 Sch.B1 para.88 in favour of appointing another administrator to con.duct an independent review into the terms and circumstances of that contract

Court considered respective priorities of prior floating charge with negative pledge and crystallisation clause, and fixed charge.

The guarantor had a realistic prospect of establishing that its guarantee liability had been discharged by an agreement under which the debtor agreed to make two substantial payments earlier than it was contractually bound to do in return for the creditor agreeing to continue or recommence shipping goods.

Applicant third party creditors entitled to enforce a guarantee notwithstanding that they were not signatories to it.

On application to annul or rescind a bankruptcy order, court could review decision to make order where it had new material.

Whether arrangements made in the course of the purchase of shares in a company, in particular securities given as part of those arrangements, constituted unlawful financial assistance by the company.

It was an implied term of the Tesco Executive Share Option Scheme that employees would not be entitled to exercise their share option so long as they were in such breach of contract as would have entitled Tesco to terminate their contract of employment.

Whether there had been unfairly prejudicial conduct so as to justify minority shareholder’s claim for relief, and how to value the shares on an unfair prejudice petition.

Court lifted a stay of proceedings arising from failure to meet the date for payment of security for costs where the reason was genuine inability to pay and criteria under CPR 3.9(1) were met.

Not an abuse of process to bring separate proceedings on similar facts against different defendants who were not privies.

When applying concept of "the harmful event" to constructive trust claim based on knowing receipt or dishonest assistance, to establish jurisdiction under Art.5(3) Brussels Convention, the relevant harmful act had to be done by the defendant and not by others.

The change in the character of possession of a vendor/lessee upon a sale and leaseback was sufficient to establish that a constructive delivery had been made for the purposes of s.24 Sale of Goods Act 1979 (seller in possession).

Court considered circumstances in which doctrine of frustration could be invoked.

Whether a director's debenture securing his loan to the company to stave off insolvency constituted a fixed or floating charge.

Computation of time limit for challenging a CVA under the Insolvency Act.

For personal service to be effected, a defendant must have been given a sufficient degree of possession of it for him to exercise dominion over it for a period of time, however brief.

A vesting order under s.181 of the Insolvency Act 1986 can only be made in favour of a landlord free of the sublessees’ interests.

Even if the debtor’s cross-claim exceeded the petition debt, it was appropriate to take into account the overall state of account between the debtor and petitioning creditor.

Receiver's offer of undertaking to pay for the value of suppliers' goods disposed of during the receivership should be accepted in place of injunction restraining sale.

A fixed charge did not become a floating charge following assignment. The court considered the requirements for fixed and floating charges.

In a retention of title dispute, the court would not grant an injunction to restrain receivers from selling the disputed goods where they had offered a personal undertaking to pay for goods used by them and to which the supplier had retained title.