Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
New liquidator appointed where votes at creditors’ meeting were wrongly disallowed
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court makes order appointing different liquidator to insolvent company pursuant to statute, finding, inter alia, that: (a) the directors, as admitted creditors of the company, were entitled to vote without showing an unambiguous written record of their loans; (b) the chairman of the meeting was not entitled to refuse to allow a creditor to vote on the ground that no proxy had been produced and the creditor's representative was not obliged to provide a copy of a resolution or, indeed, to provide any evidence of her authority, unless and until she was required to produce it; and (c) the consequence of a successful challenge to the correctness of a decision made by the chairman of a creditors’ meeting is not to make the other original nominee the liquidator but to engage the court's power to direct that some other person shall be the liquidator.
Application by Revenue Commissioners for an order appointing a new liquidator for a limited company in place of the current liquidator - order pursuant to s. 588(5) of the Companies Act 2014 - company's business selling cakes and confectionery - cease trading in February 2019 - creditors meeting - meeting adjourned by chair rather than allowing vote on liquidator other than that proposed by the company - meeting not adjourned to specific time or place - second creditors meeting with irregular procedure for proxy votes on the liquidator to be appointed - certain proxies not accepted and no vote allowed at meeting - whether s. 588(5) only allows for the removal of liquidator nominated by the creditors and hence premise of application is that liquidator was validly appointed by the creditors - whether purported representatives were valid proxies - whether if infirmities identified in procedure in meeting that the other liquidator nominated in the meeting was automatically the new liquidator or whether Revenue could seek to have a liquidator from its panel nominated.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
