19 March 2009 / Mark Parkhouse , Kerry Scott

Issue: 7361 / Categories: Opinion , Local government , Public

printer

mail-detail

A fair deal?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Mark Parkhouse & Kerry Scott on the criticism of pre-package administrations

* * * * * *

Insolvency issues are rarely far from the front page of most newspapers these days. In particular, the use of prepackaged administrations (pre-packs) has been the focus of vigorous recent criticism.

This article considers if the criticisms are justified and whether current provisions, including the Statement of Insolvency Practice 16 “Pre-packaged Sales in Administrations” (SIP 16) (which came into effect in England and Wales on 1 January 2009), will appease creditors' concerns.

Aims of administration

In order to consider pre-packs in context, it is first useful to recap on the aims which are imposed on administrators by legislation (Insolvency Act 1986 (as amended), Sch B1, para 3(1)):

(i) The prime objective—to rescue the company as a going concern; or

(ii) The second objective—to achieve a better result for the company's creditors as a whole than would otherwise be the case if the company were simply to be wound up (without first

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

A fair deal?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Mark Parkhouse & Kerry Scott on the criticism of pre-package administrations

* * * * * *

Insolvency issues are rarely far from the front page of most newspapers these days. In particular, the use of prepackaged administrations (pre-packs) has been the focus of vigorous recent criticism.

This article considers if the criticisms are justified and whether current provisions, including the Statement of Insolvency Practice 16 “Pre-packaged Sales in Administrations” (SIP 16) (which came into effect in England and Wales on 1 January 2009), will appease creditors' concerns.

Aims of administration

In order to consider pre-packs in context, it is first useful to recap on the aims which are imposed on administrators by legislation (Insolvency Act 1986 (as amended), Sch B1, para 3(1)):

(i) The prime objective—to rescue the company as a going concern; or

(ii) The second objective—to achieve a better result for the company's creditors as a whole than would otherwise be the case if the company were simply to be wound up (without first

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS

NLJ this week: Surrogacy children caught in succession gap

A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’

NLJ this week: Online safety law at a crossroads

Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design

NLJ this week: Do Mandelson and Mountbatten-Windsor meet the misconduct bar?

Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle

NLJ this week: Supreme Court unlocks ‘lost years’ windfall for injured children

A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings

NLJ this week: Finality trumps freedom in arbitration showdown

A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996

back-to-top-scroll