Search News & Insights
The liquidator escapes
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.