Matheson


News and Insights

Print this page

Search News & Insights


The liquidator escapes

AUTHOR(S): Stuart Margetson, Nicola Dunleavy
PRACTICE AREA GROUP: Commercial Real Estate, Environmental, Planning and Safety
DATE: 27.10.2011

Claim against the liquidator abandoned

The claim against the liquidator was abandoned because he was an insolvency practitioner and had no personal responsibility for the present state of the site. The court found that there is nothing to suggest that the “liquidator himself did anything wrong after his appointment”. 

It is 'personal responsibility' that may give rise to future concerns. What is involved in the concept of doing nothing wrong is not explained. 

Interpreting the risk to liquidators in light of this case and the leading Irish Ispat case (in which a liquidator also escaped clean up costs), liquidators need to carefully consider what actions to take, or not to take, if it transpires that there may be issues of unlawful storage of waste - given the very wide meaning of the word "waste" in environmental law.

To read full article, please click here.

BACK TO LISTING

Matheson Snapshot


About cookies on our website

Following a revised EU directive on website cookies, each company based, or doing business, in the EU is required to notify users about the cookies used on their website.

Our site uses cookies to improve your experience of certain areas of the site and to allow the use of specific functionality like social media page sharing. You may delete and block all cookies from this site, but as a result parts of the site may not work as intended.

To find out more about what cookies are, which cookies we use on this website and how to delete and block cookies, please see our Which cookies we use page.

Click on the button below to accept the use of cookies on this website (this will prevent the dialogue box from appearing on future visits)