Business Law: John Bradshaw on avoiding pitfalls in Retention of Title cases
- Credit: Archant
Retention of Title (ROT) is the term used to describe an attempt by a seller to incorporate terms into a contract for the sale of goods which have the effect of preventing ownership from passing to the buyer until certain conditions, typically payment in full, have been met.
In the lead up to a formal insolvency appointment pressures on cash-flow are frequently experienced and, accordingly, creditors and insolvency practitioners often find themselves having to assert or respond to ROT claims.
In the recent case of Blue Monkey Gaming Ltd v Hudson & others, the High Court provided guidance which will be of assistance to insolvency practitioners (in that case administrators) and ROT creditors alike.
The judgment is lengthy and deals with a number of issues, the following of which are of particular note in relation to insolvency related ROT claims generally:
: : Given that administrators are strangers to a business, absent their assuming specific responsibility for identifying the goods to which an ROT claim is asserted, that obligation lies with the creditor;
You may also want to watch:
: : An administrator’s obligations are to allow a creditor access to the goods for the purposes of identifying, marking and segregating them and thereafter to determine the validity of the ROT claim;
: : A creditor asserting an ROT claim should act swiftly in compiling a detailed list of the goods claimed (including identifying features) and attending the premises urgently in order to inspect, identify and segregate goods. Thereafter, they should ensure that any request for delivery up or conditionality as to the continued use of the goods properly identifies the goods in question and is clear and unequivocal as to the creditor’s position and demands;
- 1 Boss who boasted of lavish lifestyle is bankrupt with £100k debts
- 2 History of the Cook cull - a look back at his busy transfer windows with Chesterfield, Portsmouth and Wigan
- 3 Felixstowe beach hut goes on sale for record price
- 4 Woman's body found in village home
- 5 A14 delays as police deal with incident near Orwell Bridge
- 6 Indian Covid variant being monitored in Suffolk after one case confirmed
- 7 A14 re-opens after medical emergency
- 8 ‘Unique’ farm in coveted river setting hits market for first time in 60 years
- 9 How many of these 11 award-winning Suffolk food businesses do you know?
- 10 'Things might have been very different'... outgoing skipper Chambers reflects on that play-off season
: : The reasons for any refusal to deliver up the goods should be well documented to ensure that if a creditor makes a court application they do so in full knowledge of the administrator’s reasoning; and
: : On an ongoing basis, a debtor should specify the invoices against which the payments are made so as to attempt to restrict the scope and effect of any ROT terms.
ROT claims remain a thorny issue for creditors and insolvency practitioners alike. Documentation, practical steps, early action and advice are often the key to resolving issues without the need for the court’s intervention.
: : John Bradshaw is director of the insolvency and business recovery team at Barker Gotelee.