Re Harris Simons Construction Ltd
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Re Harris Simons Construction Ltd'' 9891 WLR 368 is a
UK insolvency law United Kingdom insolvency law regulates companies in the United Kingdom which are unable to repay their debts. While UK bankruptcy law concerns the rules for natural persons, the term insolvency is generally used for companies formed under the ...
case concerning the administration procedure when a company is unable to repay its debts.


Facts

Harris Simons Construction Ltd was a building company. From April 1985 to 1988 its turnover increased from £830,000 to £27 million. It all came from one client called Berkley House plc. They had a close relationship but it went sour, and Berkley purported to dismiss them. It withheld several million pounds in payments. Harris Simons could not pay debts as they fell due or carry on trading. The report of the proposed administrator said it would be very difficult to sell any part of the business. Berkley said if an administration order were made it would give enough funding to let the company complete four contracts on condition it remove itself from the sites that were in dispute. The company therefore proposed an administration order under the
Insolvency Act 1986 The Insolvency Act 1986c 45 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that provides the legal platform for all matters relating to personal and corporate insolvency in the UK. History The Insolvency Act 1986 followed the publication and ...
, section 8(3) (now Insolvency Act 1986, Schedule B1, para 12(1)(a)). The question was whether the court should exercise its jurisdiction and whether the order would be likely to achieve the specified purposes of administration (now found in the Insolvency Act 1986, Schedule B1, para 3).


Judgment

Hoffmann J held that an administration order should be made because there was a reasonable possibility that a purpose of administration, i.e. saving the company or business, would be achieved. This could also be termed as a "real prospect", or a "good arguable case". It did not need to be satisfied that the administration would succeed on the "
balance of probabilities In a legal dispute, one party has the burden of proof to show that they are correct, while the other party had no such burden and is presumed to be correct. The burden of proof requires a party to produce evidence to establish the truth of facts ...
", although there needed to be a greater prospect of success than just a "mere possibility". His judgment went as follows. 9891 WLR 368, 370-371 and L Sealy and S Worthington, ''Cases and Materials in Company Law'' (9th edn OUP 2010) 728


See also

*
UK insolvency law United Kingdom insolvency law regulates companies in the United Kingdom which are unable to repay their debts. While UK bankruptcy law concerns the rules for natural persons, the term insolvency is generally used for companies formed under the ...


Notes

{{reflist, 2


References

*L Sealy and S Worthington, ''Cases and Materials in Company Law'' (9th edn OUP 2010) *R Goode, ''Principles of Corporate Insolvency Law'' (4th edn Sweet & Maxwell 2011) United Kingdom insolvency case law High Court of Justice cases 1989 in United Kingdom case law