(1)This section applies where a voluntary arrangement approved by a decision of the debtor's creditors pursuant to section 257 has taken effect.
(2)The person who is for the time being carrying out, in relation to the voluntary arrangement, the functions conferred by virtue of the approval on the nominee (or his replacement under section 256(3), 256A(4) or 258(3)) shall be known as the supervisor of the voluntary arrangement.
(3)If the debtor, any of his creditors or any other person is dissatisfied by any act, omission or decision of the supervisor, he may apply to the court; and on such an application the court may—
(a)confirm, reverse or modify any act or decision of the supervisor,
(b)give him directions, or
(c)make such other order as it thinks fit.
(4)The supervisor may apply to the court for directions in relation to any particular matter arising under the voluntary arrangement.
(5)The court may, whenever—
(a)it is expedient to appoint a person to carry out the functions of the supervisor, and
(b)it is inexpedient, difficult or impracticable for an appointment to be made without the assistance of the court, make an order appointing a person who is qualified to act as an insolvency practitioner or authorised to act as supervisor, in relation to the voluntary arrangement , either in substitution for the existing supervisor or to fill a vacancy.
...
(6)The power conferred by subsection (5) is exercisable so as to increase the number of persons exercising the functions of the supervisor or, where there is more than one person exercising those functions, so as to replace one or more of those persons.
Cases considering section 263 9
[2004] EWCA Civ 1761 · 22 November 2004Defines
The court treated section 263 as the statutory framework for applications concerning the supervisor of an individual voluntary arrangement, including the remedial and procedural issues raised in the appeal (see paras [1], [4], [36]).
The court used section 263(2) to identify the nominee as becoming the supervisor once the voluntary arrangement had been approved and taken effect (see para [4]).
The court treated section 263(3) as the framework for challenging a supervisor’s act, omission or decision and considering appropriate relief. The application was misconceived against the supervisor alone because the debtor was no longer a party and loss had not been established (see paras [1], [4], [33]–[36]).
Before compensation could be ordered, the court would need to decide whether the supervisor’s act or decision should be confirmed, reversed or modified, and assess any resulting loss (see para [34]).
Cited only.
The court left open whether section 263(3)(c) could confer power to make a compensation order in a case of this nature. It held that no such order could proceed here without first determining the supervisor’s act and the recoverable loss (see paras [34]–[35]).
[2010] EWHC 485 (Ch) · 11 March 2010
Provides the procedural basis for challenging the nominee’s decision concerning creditor status. The challenge failed because the Applicant was held to be a creditor for IVA purposes (see paras [4], [26]).
[2010] EWCA Civ 1344 · 24 November 2010Defines
The court identifies the supervisor as the person carrying out the nominee’s functions in relation to the IVA. (see para [10])
The provision supplied the procedural route for challenging the supervisor’s decision. It was the basis of the Commission’s application concerning creditor status. (see paras [5]; [11]; [50])
1 more judgment, and what each says about section 263, are in the
case-law panel in the full Act.