Administrators’ appointment valid - Minmar not followed by Norris J
Date: Thursday 22nd December, 2011
Author: Chris Laughton
Profile: Chris Laughton
The failure of directors to notify the company, in accordance with Paragraph 26, Schedule B1, Insolvency Act 1986, of their intention to appoint administrators does not necessarily render the administrators' appointment invalid.
In two carefully considered judgments in cases heard on consecutive days in November 2011, the most recent of which was handed down on 21 December:
Mr Justice Norris explains how he has been able to clarify the previously unsatisfactory state of the law.
We noted in May the surprising and unhelpful Minmar decision. Like me (but he expresses it far more eloquently in Virtualpurple), Norris J prefers the decision of HHJ McCahill QC in Hill v Stokes Plc  EWHC 3726.
In Bezier, Norris J held that delivery of the notice of intention to appoint to the company's solicitors was adequate, notwithstanding the apparent requirement of the Insolvency Rules that service on the company be effected by delivering the notice to its registered office.
What a sensible way to end the year! Christmas greetings and best wishes for 2012 to all our readers.
Chris Laughton is a Restructuring & Insolvency partner at Mercer & Hole. The views given in this post are personal to the author. If you would like to discuss the contents of this post with Chris, you can call him on +44 20 7353 1597.
Keywords: Virtualpurple Bezier Norris administration Minmar "Hill v Stokes" "invalid appointment"
Please note that the opinions expressed in this blog represent the views of the author and not the views of Mercer & Hole.