Insolvency Act 1986, Schedule B1, paragraph 25

SCHEDULE B1 ADMINISTRATION

25 An administrator of a company may not be appointed under paragraph 22 if—

(a) a petition for the winding up of the company has been presented and is not yet disposed of,

(b) an administration application has been made and is not yet disposed of, or

(c) an administrative receiver of the company is in office.

Definitions used in Schedule B1, paragraph 25 4

administrator

1 (1) For the purposes of this Act “administrator” of a company means a person appointed under this Schedule to manage the company’s affairs, business and property.

Defined in Sch.B1 para.1(1) · see it in the full Act

“administrator” has the meaning given by paragraph 1 and, where the context requires, includes a reference to a former administrator,

Defined in Sch.B1 para.111(1) · see it in the full Act
the company

2 Section 233B does not apply in relation to a contract for the supply of goods or services to a company (“the company”) where any of paragraphs 3 to 11 applies.

Defined in Sch.4ZZA para.2 · see it in the full Act
company

(1A) In this Schedule, “company” means—

(a)a company registered under the Companies Act 2006 in England and Wales or Scotland,

(b)a company incorporated in an EEA State ..., or

(c)a company not incorporated in an EEA State but having its centre of main interests in a member State (other than Denmark) or in the United Kingdom .

Defined in Sch.B1 para.111(1A) · see it in the full Act
administrative receiver

“administrative receiver” has the meaning given by section 251,

Defined in Sch.B1 para.111(1) · see it in the full Act

Cases considering Schedule B1, paragraph 25 6

Business Dream Ltd, Re Insolvency Act 1986

[2011] EWHC 2860 (Ch) · 2 November 2011Interprets

Interpreted as preventing an out-of-court appointment under paragraph 22 where a winding-up petition has been presented and remains undisposed of. It does not prevent filing a notice of intention to appoint under paragraph 27.

Ramora UK Ltd, Re

[2011] EWHC 3959 (Ch) · 26 August 2011Interprets

The court interpreted paragraph 25 as excluding a winding-up petition presented in contravention of the interim moratorium. That construction prevented the petition from defeating an otherwise valid appointment under paragraph 22 (see paras [2], [7]-[10]).

Arucana Ltd, Re

[2009] EWHC 3838 (Ch) · 3 July 2009

Applied to prevent the directors from proceeding with the appointment of administrators while the winding-up petition remained issued and undisposed of (see para [16]).

What each judgment says about Schedule B1, paragraph 25 is in the case-law panel in the full Act.