ARTICLE
1 April 2015

Questioning Receivership

MG
Maples Group

Contributor

The Maples Group is a leading service provider offering clients a comprehensive range of legal services on the laws of the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Ireland, Jersey and Luxembourg, and is an independent provider of fiduciary, fund services, regulatory and compliance, and entity formation and management services.
A lender appointed receivers over certain assets, which ITC held on trust for a sub-fund.
Ireland Finance and Banking

In Independent Trustee Company v Registrar of Companies 2015, the plaintiff (ITC) challenged the Irish Registrar of Companies (or Companies Registration Office: the CRO). The plaintiff claimed that the CRO gave the status of "receivership" on the register of companies to a company which had a receiver appointed over some and not all of its assets.

A lender appointed receivers over certain assets, which ITC held on trust for a sub-fund. The lender placed the usual advertisement in a newspaper and notified the CRO of the appointment.

Before the High Court (Judge Hunt), ITC argued that the relevant provisions of the Irish Companies Act 1963 (Act), did not apply where a company had no beneficial interest in the property. Evidence was given that creditors, customers and business counterparties of ITC had been alarmed at this development. ITC argued that the label 'receivership' implied that it was insolvent, which was not accurate.

Please click here to read the full article.

This article was originally published in the April edition of the International Financial Law Review. 

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More