Judgment has been given this morning by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the following case:
BTI 2014 LLC (Appellant) v Sequana SA and others (Respondents) - [2022] UKSC 25
On appeal from: [2019] EWCA Civ 112
Sequana’s subsidiary was liable to indemnify BAT for costs arising from the clean-up of a polluted river. The directors of the subsidiary resolved that it should pay a substantial dividend to Sequana, without – BAT says – leaving enough money in the subsidiary to pay for the clean-up costs.
The Supreme Court unanimously dismisses BTI’s appeal. All members of the Court agree that AWA’s directors were not at the relevant time under a duty to consider, or to act in accordance with, the interests of creditors in the circumstances of this appeal. Lord Briggs gives the majority judgment, with which Lord Kitchin agrees. Lord Hodge gives a concurring judgment. Lord Reed and Lady Arden each give judgments which concur in the result for reasons that are broadly similar to those of the majority, but with some differences.
More information is available on our website: UKSC 2019/0046
