Re Augustus Barnett & Son Ltd [1986]

Re Augustus Barnett & Son Ltd [1986] BCLC 170 serves as a significant precedent in UK company law and insolvency law, clarifying the standard of fault required to establish guilt in cases of fraudulent trading. The judgment highlighted the necessity of proving intent to defraud within the company, excluding the state of mind of external parties, and underscored the importance of specific allegations of fraudulent conduct against the directors for personal liability to be established.

Augustus Barnett & Sons Ltd (Barnett), a subsidiary of Rumasa SA, operated as a prominent UK retail store specialising in wine and sherry export. Barnett faced a deficiency of assets, prompting auditors to insist on ongoing support from Rumasa. In response, Rumasa issued a letter of comfort on June 1, 1982, committing to provide additional working capital. However, the situation took a turn when Rumasa was nationalised by the Spanish government on February 23, 1983. Barnett's financial troubles escalated, with its asset deficiency reaching £4.5 million.

As Barnett's financial health deteriorated, auditors and legal advisors cautioned that the directors were at risk of personal liability for fraudulent trading. The legal framework at the time fell under the Companies Act 1948, specifically Section 332, which allowed the court to declare individuals personally responsible for company debts if the business was carried on with the intent to defraud creditors. To mitigate these risks, the auditors recommended settling debts promptly.

Subsequently, on September 2, 1983, Barnett entered voluntary liquidation. The liquidators sought a declaration that Rumasa was a knowing party to fraudulent trading. In response, Rumasa argued that there was no reasonable cause of action, asserting that there were no allegations of dishonesty or fraudulent intent on the part of Barnett's directors.

In rendering judgment, Hoffmann J sided with Rumasa's application to strike out the claim. He analysed Section 332 of the Companies Act 1948 and underscored that the Section required a specific finding – that someone within the company had carried on the business with intent to defraud – for personal responsibility to be imposed. Hoffmann J emphasised that the state of mind of external parties, such as Rumasa, was irrelevant to this provision. While acknowledging the possibility of an action in the tort of deceit, Hoffmann J clarified that such an action did not align with Section 332. Importantly, because there were no allegations of fraud against Barnett's directors, Rumasa, as the parent company, could not be considered an accessory.

In an obiter dictum, Hoffmann J briefly addressed the liquidator's argument regarding Rumasa's letter of comfort potentially making the parent company liable for Barnett's debts. While recognising the inadequacy of the law on this subject, he deemed the ongoing proceedings unsuitable for a broader investigation. Hoffmann J emphasised the clarity of the language in Section 332, leaving the question of the letter of comfort's implications for another day.

The outcome of the case rested on the absence of allegations of fraudulent intent by Barnett's directors. The judgment clarified the stringent requirement of intent to defraud within the company for personal liability under Section 332 and highlighted the inapplicability of external parties' state of mind to this provision. The case serves as a notable precedent in understanding the standard of fault required to establish guilt in cases of fraudulent trading under UK insolvency law.
Back to blog
UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

Get ready for the SQE1 with high-performance SQE Study Guides developed by UOLLB and published by UOL Press to revolutionise your study method and exam strategy.

Turbocharge SQE Performance

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 essential case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding.
Speed up your revision with us now👇

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Council of Europe
Crown Prosecution Service
Baker Mckenzie 
Yale University
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
INSEAD
University of London
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law

    Terminology

    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory

    Exam-focused

    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.