Where does Rubin leave Isle of Man insolvency practitioners?

The recent decision of Rubin v Euro Finance SA and others [2012] UK SC 46 has been welcomed in England and Wales as clarifying the English common law applying to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments made in relation to foreign insolvency proceedings.

In contrast to the case of Cambridge Gas Transportation Corpn v Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Navigator Holdings PLC [2006] 2 All ER (Comm) 695, PC the Supreme Court determined in Rubin that the recognition and enforcement of foreign insolvency judgments is subject to the same common law restrictions which apply to the enforcement of any other type of foreign judgment in England and Wales. Rubin has rejected Lord Hoffman’s finding in Cambridge Gas that a foreign judgment in insolvency proceedings can be automatically enforced under common law without applying the normal common law restrictions, which would apply to the enforcement of a foreign judgment in rem or in personam not made in insolvency proceedings. Lord Hoffman found that insolvency proceedings are merely a mechanism for enforcing creditors’ rights rather than establishing them. In rejecting this approach the Supreme Court has restored the restrictions upon the circumstances in which a foreign insolvency judgment can be enforced in England and Wales under the common law. However, this narrowing of the common law may not necessarily be followed by the Court in the Isle of Man…

If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Appleby briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.

Briefings from Appleby

View more briefings from Appleby

Analysis from The Lawyer

View more analysis from The Lawyer


1st Floor
3 Copthall Avenue

Total staff: 528
Partners: 64