TCPC Management Limited v Windrush Alliance UK Community Interest Company
[2024] EWHC 809 (Ch)
Lendinvest BTL Limited v Property Services LDN Limited
18 July 2023
[2023] EWHC 1778 (Ch)
High Court
A company owed money and didn't pay. They tried to avoid paying by saying they were owed more money and that the first debt was wrongly owed. The judge didn't believe them because they didn't provide enough proof and only said so at the last minute, so the company has to pay up.
Key Facts
- •Lendinvest BTL Ltd (Petitioner) filed a winding-up petition against Property Services LDN Ltd (Company) due to unpaid costs (£20,000) from a previous Queen's Bench Division case (QB-2021-002969).
- •The Company opposed the petition, claiming a larger cross-claim against the Petitioner and arguing the costs order was invalid.
- •The dispute stemmed from the sale of four properties owned by Laverstock Management Corporation Ltd (Laverstock), which was in administration.
- •Laverstock had allegedly sold the properties to the Company before the Petitioner appointed receivers.
- •The Petitioner's receivers sold the properties at auction, leading to the Company's claim of inducement of breach of contract against the Petitioner.
Legal Principles
A winding-up order will not be made if the debt is genuinely disputed on substantial grounds.
Colicolour Ltd v Camtrex Ltd [2015] EWHC 3202 (Ch)
If a debtor company asserts a cross-claim, it must be genuine and serious; one of substance.
Re Bayoil SA [1999] 1 WLR 147
The court will consider the evidence in detail, even if it involves an exercise similar to an application for summary judgment.
Re A Company No.006685 [1997] BCC 830
A cross-claim must be demonstrated with evidence; bare assertions are insufficient.
LDX International Group LLP v Misra Ventures Limited [2018] EWHC 275 (Ch)
The company must properly explain the basis of the claimed dispute and show it's substantial.
Winnington Networks Communications Ltd v HM Revenue & Customs [2015] B.C.C. 554
Elements of the tort of inducing breach of contract (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd v James Kemball Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 33)
Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd v James Kemball Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 33
Outcomes
The winding-up petition succeeds.
The Company failed to raise a genuine and substantial cross-claim with sufficient evidence and proper particularization. The alleged claim was not promptly raised, inadequately evidenced, and lacked proof of inducement.