Skip to main content

Directors and insolvency – where do you stand?

It has been settled law for many years that as a company approached insolvency there was a point when the interests of the creditors became paramount. From this point forward the directors are in danger of creating a personal liability for any additional loss suffered by the company and creditors.

Producing a test that defined the moment when creditor’s interest duty engaged has always been problematical for judges.

This issue reared its head again in the case of BTI AT Industries PLC v Sequana SA (“Sequana”) a decision of the Court of Appeal handed down on 6th February 2019. The forum in this case was that of section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. This section of the Act permits the Court to review and overturn transactions designed to put assets beyond the reach of creditors.

Section 423 of Act provides a cause of action, under the heading of “Transactions defrauding creditors”.  This heading can be misleading as it is not in fact necessary to show a dishonest or fraudulent purpose in order to establish a claim under s423. 

Two requirements must be established:

  1. The claimant must show that a person (a company or individual) has entered into a transaction at undervalue.  This will include an outright gift, or a transaction in which the consideration received was significantly less than that given.
  2. The claimant must show that the transaction was entered into for the purpose of putting assets beyond the reach of creditors or future creditors, or otherwise prejudicing their interests.  The purpose need not be the sole purpose, or even the dominant purpose. It is sufficient to show that the purpose of avoiding creditors was at least one of the substantial purposes of the transaction.  It is not necessary that the creditors in question be in existence at the time the transaction is entered into.

The relief available to a successful claimant will be orders restoring the position to what it would have been but for the transaction.  The court’s discretion in terms of relief is wide, and can (subject to a “good faith” exception) include orders against any third party that has received a benefit as a result of the transaction. A very significant liability can result.

The Court of Appeal decided that the duty arises when the directors know or should know that the company is or is likely to become insolvent (which probably means cash flow insolvent). ‘Likely’, for these purposes, means more probable and not some lower test.

The fact that the facts were exceptional does not meant that the test will not apply in more routine circumstances. It will also apply in wrongful trading claims. This is a case with real practical consequences for directors in all companies in financial difficulty.

If you require legal assistance for dealing with insolvency please contact us by email djb@winstonsolicitors.co.uk or call 0113 218 5423.

Client feedback

Very happy with Winstons, Amr was a tremendous help guiding me and my partner through our first house pruchase. He ws thorough and prompt at all times.
Charlotte a
Very attentive service and excellent communication throughout the selling process. Would firmly recommendation and will be using again for my purchase. Thank you!
Anonymous
Great experience with Winston Solicitors. Communication was clear and consistent, and the work was completed quickly and efficiently. Overall, a smooth and professional service
Subiea
I am very pleased with the service I received from Winstons, this is the second time I have dealt with them for conveyancing services and on both occasions Leasa was incredibly thorough and reassured me every step of the way. When other parties failed to deliver, Leasa ensured things were chased up and delivered/received with accuracy. I would highly recommend and will be sure to use Winston's again for any future property purchases
Charis
Would highly recommend Winston's.Both Leasa and Julie were extremely professional and we recieved regular email and direct call updates.In the middle of an extremely challenging chain, they went above and beyond and became intermediary's liasing with everyone else in order to get the conveyancing completed on time.Thanks again for a great service.Regards
Richard
My conveyancer Samantha and her associate Michelle kept me informed of the progress of my sale throughout the transaction. It was of benefit to me that the Winston office was local with plenty of parking. I would recommend them for any conveyancing
Ms H
Winston’s acted for us with our house sale and onward purchase. They have been excellent from start to finish. Leasa is extremely quick to respond to emails and more than happy to answer any questions. The online system is very efficient and helps keep you up to date with progress of the sale/purchase. Leasa and her team made the whole process so much less stressful than it could’ve been and we can’t thank them enough. We wouldn’t hesitate to recommend them.
Lucy
Teresa and Judith assisted with my recent divorce and i cannot rate them highly enough, i was talked through every aspect and everything was explained in full and i was kept fully updated and imformed of everything that i needed to do and when it was required for. Their patience when i was working away and understanding was especially appreciated.Once that was all complete Amanda and Samantha and the convayensing team sorted the transfer of the house and the paperwork associated with that.I would highly recommend them and thier company for any legal issues you have and would use thier services again without hesitation.
Richard J
Contact David