header-logo header-logo

12 May 2025
Categories: Legal News , Insolvency
printer mail-detail

Bilta confirms scope of fraudulent trading provisions

The Supreme Court has dismissed both sides’ appeals in the landmark insolvency case of Bilta

Bilta v Tradition Financial Services [2025] UKSC 18 concerned tax liabilities arising from a form of VAT fraud involving EU carbon credit trading known as ‘missing trader intra-community fraud’.

Insolvent companies brought proceedings against Tradition, arguing it had knowingly participated in the scheme, and was liable for having dishonestly assisted the directors of the fraudulent companies in breaching their duties as directors.

The dispute centred on whether Tradition fell within the scope of s 213, Insolvency Act 1986, and whether the dishonest assistance claim was time-barred. The High Court and Court of Appeal held Tradition was within scope and was also time-barred.

Both sides appealed. Handing down judgment this week, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed both appeals and upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal.

Section 213 gives the court powers to make parties contribute to the assets of an insolvent company if, in the course of the winding up of the company, it emerges they were ‘knowingly’ parties to business carried out with a fraudulent purpose.

Sophia Purkis, partner, Fladgate, said: ‘The Supreme Court has upheld the landmark decision in Bilta which shall help liquidators and the victims of fraud to recover losses using s 213 Insolvency Act 1986. 

‘The provision was held to extend beyond a strict reading of “any persons who were knowingly parties to the carrying on of the business” as referring solely to the company’s management and control by holding that “it could very well apply to someone routinely transacting with the company in the knowledge that the company was carrying on a fraudulent business”. Again, the court has demonstrated that it shall interpret legislation using strict principles which may assist victims to find recourse.’

Categories: Legal News , Insolvency
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll