Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 OCTOBER 2026

Hinton v Stobinski

Wedlake Bell LLP
Wedlake Bell LLP
Contributor
Wedlake Bell LLP

Wedlake Bell LLP

Wedlake Bell provides clients with a full package of legal services delivering commercial and...

View firm profile
Explore more from Wedlake Bell LLP

A recent High Court judgment examines whether liquidators can pursue director loan account debts through section 212 of the Insolvency Act 1986, or whether such claims must be brought separately under CPR Part 7. The case explores the scope of "misfeasance" and "breach of duty" within insolvency proceedings, with significant implications for procedural strategy in director liability claims.

United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Frances Coulson
Frances Coulson

Deputy ICC Judge Curl KC’s judgment in Hinton v Stobinski (Re St Mark Lions Ltd) [2026] EWHC 2386 (Ch) deals with a run of the mill application by a liquidator for relief in relation to breaches of duty on the part of the sole director of a company and recovery from him of sums owing on his overdrawn loan account.

The latter issue gave rise to an interesting, if arid, argument about the scope of the use of s 212 Insolvency Act 1986 and the procedural consequences, which, although important, made little or no difference to the overall result in this case, but might do in others.

The liquidator’s claims were brought by way of application in the liquidator’s name under r 1.35 Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016. A procedural objection to that was raised on behalf of the respondent, Dr Stobinski, which turned on the scope of s 212. Counsel for Dr Stobinski submitted that the liquidator was precluded from asserting a claim in debt against his client by an application under r 1.35

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.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Woodville Collapse And Regulatory Reform – Litigation Funding In The Spotlight

The collapse of Woodville Consultants Ltd has exposed significant vulnerabilities in the rapidly expanding litigation funding market, which operates largely outside mainstream financial regulation. With nearly £300 million owed to retail investors and questionable lending practices to law firms, the case raises critical questions about investor protection, regulatory oversight, and the future balance of power in funded litigation.
United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
RPC
RPC
Article

Hunkemöller: English Court Stays Liability Management Exercise Litigation Pending Judgment In Parallel New York Proceedings

The English High Court has stayed proceedings challenging Hunkemöller's liability management exercise pending judgment in related New York litigation. This decision examines the limitations of multi-jurisdictional litigation strategies in cross-border restructurings and the enforceability of exclusive jurisdiction clauses for beneficial noteholders. The ruling provides critical guidance on the sequencing of claims across different jurisdictions when challenging complex liability management exercises.
United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
A&O Shearman
A&O Shearman
Article

High Court Rules That Administrators May Be Able To Pay Administration Expenses And Litigation Funding Ahead Of “super Priority” Moratorium Debts

The High Court has determined that administrators can enter into litigation funding arrangements allowing funders to be repaid from litigation proceeds ahead of moratorium debts with "super priority" status, provided this aligns with the administration's purpose and the administrators' duties. This ruling addresses a critical question about the interplay between protected moratorium creditors and the practical realities of funding litigation in insolvency proceedings.
United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
Article

A Guide To Misfeasance Claims Against Directors

Directors of insolvent companies may face misfeasance claims when liquidators or administrators investigate potential misuse of company funds, breaches of fiduciary duties, or prioritizing personal interests over creditors. Understanding the legal framework under section 212 of the Insolvency Act 1986, common allegations, and available defenses is crucial for directors navigating these serious investigations that can result in personal liability and disqualification.
United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Weightmans LLP
Weightmans LLP
Article

Mental Health Moratorium Fails To Block Receiver Sale

The High Court has clarified the interaction between mental health crisis moratoriums under the Debt Respite Scheme and secured lending enforcement. When property security covers a company's debt rather than an individual's personal liability, receivers can proceed with sales despite the moratorium. This decision provides crucial guidance for insolvency practitioners and lenders navigating the complex intersection of mental health protections and security enforcement.
United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Mills & Reeve LLP
Mills & Reeve LLP
Article

Enforcing Security: Court Of Appeal Warns On ‘improper Purpose’ In Administrator Appointments

The Court of Appeal's decision in Glint Pay Ltd v Baker examines whether secured lenders can appoint administrators when their primary motive is a hostile takeover rather than debt recovery. This case explores the boundaries of legitimate enforcement action, particularly when a company remains solvent before acceleration, and considers whether an appointment made for a solely improper purpose can be challenged and set aside.
United KingdomInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Gateley Legal
Gateley Legal
Article

Getting Your House In Order: A Private Client Checklist For September

With significant inheritance tax changes for pensions taking effect in April 2027, this comprehensive guide examines five essential areas of estate planning that families should review this autumn. From pension arrangements and regular gifting strategies to education funding, lasting powers of attorney, and digital asset management, discover practical steps to ensure your financial affairs remain aligned with your objectives and compliant with evolving tax legislation.
United KingdomWealth Management
Wedlake Bell LLP
Wedlake Bell LLP
Article

Employment Rights Act 2025: Key Changes For Employers This October

October 2026 brings significant employment law reforms under the Employment Rights Act 2025, including extended tribunal time limits, enhanced trade union rights, and strengthened sexual harassment protections. Employers must prepare for new obligations around third-party harassment liability and workplace access for union representatives. Understanding these changes is crucial for updating policies and managing compliance risks.
United KingdomEmployment and HR
Wedlake Bell LLP
Wedlake Bell LLP
Article

Here Comes The Sun And I Say “it’s Not Alright”

As extreme weather events intensify and become more frequent, construction projects face growing uncertainty over what constitutes "exceptionally adverse weather" under standard contracts like the JCT Design and Build Contract 2024. This analysis examines how weather-related delays are assessed, when extensions of time may be granted, and why parties should consider updating contractual thresholds to reflect evolving climate patterns and reduce the risk of costly disputes.
United KingdomReal Estate and Construction
Wedlake Bell LLP
Wedlake Bell LLP