The Practical Lawyer


Insolvent company – director liable for cheap deal

The HC has considered a case involving an insolvent company and the liability of directors. A director purchased a property at a substantial undervalue from the company acting by its liquidator. The allegation was that this was for the director’s own benefit and that he did not have regard to the interests of the creditors as a whole. It was alleged that this was in breach of the duties owed by the directors to the company under ss171-175 Companies Act 2006 and in particular his fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company’s creditors. The judgment helpfully summarises these provisions:

  • s171 – a director of a company must only exercise powers for the purposes for which they were conferred;
  • s172(1) – a director of a company must act in the way he considers, in good faith, would be most likely to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole;
  • s172(3) – the duties imposed by s172(1) and (2) have effect ‘subject to any enactment or rule of law requiring directors, in certain circumstances, to consider or act in the interests of creditors of the company’;
  • s174 – a director of a company must exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence;
  • s175 – a director of a company ‘must avoid a situation in which he has, or can have, a direct or indirect interest that conflicts, or possibly may conflict, with the interests of the company’.

The court held that the above provisions apply to directors beyond the life of the company and into liquidation.

The property in question was owned by the company and was not placed on the open market for sale. The judge accepted the assertion that the director saw an opportunity to ‘pick up an asset “on the cheap” and took advantage of that opportunity; an opportunity which he only knew about through his position as sole director of the company, as the property had not been put on the open market’. He also listed the circumstances which convinced him that the director knew that the property was worth significantly more than he paid for it:

  • he had a long association with the area;
  • he knew the purchase price originally paid for the property;
  • he had signed audited accounts for the company, giving the value of the property;
  • he had informed the liquidator of the higher values and he had signed a statement of affairs confirming the value;
  • the fact that the liquidator may also have been at fault was no defence as far as the director is concerned – his fiduciary duties as its director were independent of the duties owed by the liquidator.
  • The HC was not prepared to accept the argument that the director ought fairly to be excused from liability for his breach and held him liable to pay the liquidators the shortfall. Where the company is insolvent or likely to become insolvent, the duty of a director to act in the best interests of the company is regarded as a duty to act in the interests of its creditors as a whole. See System Building Services v Michie [2020] EWHC 54 (Ch) and reported on


Most-read articles

Intestacy – statutory legacy
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
The statutory legacy under the intestacy rules has increased to £270,000 with effect from 6 February 2020. It’s the first increase since October 2014. Read more...
Unsolicited publicity – SRA guidance
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
Some practitioners were somewhat aghast to read para 8.9 in the new Code of Conduct for solicitors as follows: Read more...
Part 36 offer – includes interest
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
Part 36 is a provision of the CPR which is intended to encourage parties to settle disputes without going to trial. A Part 36 offer made by either the claimant or defendant is a tactical step... Read more...
Slipping claims – burden of proof
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
In general, the law on slipping cases is reasonably settled and straightforward. An interesting article considers a question which often arises in practice, namely whether the defendant bears an... Read more...
MEES – domestic rentals reminder
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
We last reported on the MEES Regulations in our May 2019 edition (p24). The Domestic Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard (MEES) Regulations set a minimum energy efficiency level for domestic private... Read more...
Lease to family – not a relevant disposal
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
Under s1(1) LTA 1987 L shall not make a ‘relevant disposal affecting any premises to which at the time of the disposal this Part applies’ unless it has previously served notice in accordance with... Read more...
Oral trust for third party – not binding
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
A recent CC decision is an important reminder to property practitioners to advise clients to ensure that any declaration of trust is in writing. Section 53(1)(b) LPA 1925 states that: Read more...
Civil partnerships – opposite sex
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
The Civil Partnership (Opposite-sex Couples) Regulations came into force on 2 December 2019 enabling mixed-sex couples to enter into a civil partnership, as an alternative to marriage or cohabitation. Read more...
Ethical veganism – a philosophical belief
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
A vegan is someone who does not eat or use animal products. 'Ethical' veganism is more than just not eating or using animal products – it goes beyond this in that ethical vegans try to exclude all... Read more...
Stalking – orders
Wednesday, 12 February 2020
The perpetrators of stalking can now be banned from approaching and/or contacting their victims under police powers that came into force on 20 January 2020. Under the Stalking Protection Act 2019,... Read more...


IAG International
In House Lawyer
MSI Global Alliance
Join the IBA now!