Scottish Court of Session Decisions

On 1st November 1907 Hudson & Kearns, Limited, Stamford Street, London, presented a petition for the compulsory winding up of Scott Stirling&Company, Limited, 13 Campbell Street, Hamilton (of which company they were creditors), and for the appointment of an official liquidator. On 20th November Scott Stirling & Company, who had meantime resolved upon a voluntary winding-up, applied to the Court under sec. 147 of the Companies Act 1862 (25 and 26 Vict. cap. 89) to have the liquidation placed under the supervision of the Court.

Thereafter, on 26th November, the Tudor Accumulator Company, Limited, 119 Victoria Street, Westminster, London, who were creditors of Scott Stirling & Company under a decree against them for £247, presented a note in which they, inter alia, stated that Hudson & Kearns, Limited, having discharged their claim against Scott Stirling & Company, did not intend to insist further in their petition; that the affairs of Scott Stirling & Company had been in an involved condition for a considerable time; that during the past year a large number of actions had been brought against them in the Court of Session; that in these circumstances inquiry into the company's affairs was necessary in the interests of the creditors; that such inquiry could not be satisfactorily entrusted to the voluntary liquidators, who were the nominees of the directors; and that accordingly the company should be wound up by the Court and an official liquidator appointed. They accordingly craved the Court to sist them “as petitioners along with or in room and place of the said Hudson & Kearns, Limited,” and to order Scott Stirling & Company to be wound up under an official liquidator.

Scott Stirling & Company lodged answers in which they averred, inter alia, that the note was incompetent.

Counsel for the Tudor Accumulator Company, in moving that that company be sisted, stated that though the application was a novel one in Scotland it was part of the appropriate procedure in England, where such applications were frequently made and granted; and referred to the Rules, of Court (General Rules, March 1893), made pursuant to sec. 26 of the Companies (Winding up) Act 1890 (53 and 54 Vict. cap. 63), vide Buckley on the Companies Acts, 8th ed., p. 972.

Counsel for Scott Stirling & Company stated that he did not oppose the application.

The Court sisted the Tudor Accumulator Company, Limited, as petitioners in room and place of Hudson & Kearns, Limited, to the effect of enabling them to insist in the petition.