Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 11 AUGUST 2021

Assignees Cannot Use Section 212 "Shortcut"

Mills & Reeve LLP
Mills & Reeve LLP
Contributor

Mills & Reeve LLP

Mills & Reeve’s staff thrive on developing great relationships and love helping clients find...

View firm profile
Explore more from Mills & Reeve LLP

Assignee's claims for breach of duty brought by insolvency act application under Section 212 IA 1986 should have been brought by Part 7 Claim Form.

United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Jacob Walker
Jacob Walker

Assignee's claims for breach of duty brought by insolvency act application under Section 212 IA 1986 should have been brought by Part 7 Claim Form.

Section 246 ZD Insolvency Act 1986 enables the assignment of “transaction avoidance” office holder claims.

Where transaction avoidance claims are available to an office holder, there often also exists breach of duty claims arising from the same facts. Such claims are assets of the company which existed prior to liquidation.

Where both office holder claims and company claims have been assigned to a third party, it has been common practice for assignees to advance all claims within one Insolvency Act application notice.

In Manolete Partners Plc v Hayward and Barrett Holdings Ltd  the respondents challenged the applicant's ability to bring company claims for breach of duty via Section 212 IA 1986.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from