Dozens of small businesses suffer after Halliwells’ collapse

  • Print
  • Comments (19)

Readers' comments (19)

  • @Anonymous @5.03pm re clients paying for counsel's fees
    If the client has paid the solicitor for counsel's fees then surely that is client money? In which case it should be there in the client account. If it isnt then that is a matter The Lawyer should be investigating very seriously. If it is true then something was badly amiss.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vercingetorix: you'd have thought so wouldn't you?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Talk about "have your cake and eat it"!
    Charging £319.00 for some crisps, satay and chicken is pretty pricey and no wonder they went bankrupt.
    You should be ashamed of your self Mr Randhawa. Something like crisps, chicken and satay would cost about a fiver up north!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Satay is not available oop north

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I wonder - are Salford University on the list?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Alex Gill & Bladdy Norveners:
    I'm sure it mentioned somewhere that the sandwiches were supplied by a London shop. But perhaps your prejudice blinded you.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • it's been a long time since i studied commercial law, but my recollection is that if a partnership went down the partners personally were jointly and severally liable for the debts, and if a company traded and ran up debts whilst insolvent, the directors ditto. So - have a go creditors. I'm sure the ex-partners or directors of halliwell could probably scrape a few bob together

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Not all that long ago, when solicitors were in a profession, not the grubby trade it now is, leaving one's suppliers (including St Johns for goodness sake) in the lurch would have been treated as gross misconduct unbefitting a member of the (former) profession and the partners would have been struck off.
    These days in modern Britain, it is probably regarded as rather clever to behave like that.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Val - I'm surprised you admit to having studied commercial law at all.
    Firstly - Halliwell's isn't a partnership it is an LLP. Therefore the members have limited liability and are not joint and severally liabile for the debts of the business.
    Secondly you then mix up partners with directors - partners are principals in a partnership and directors are officers of a limited company. The people you refer to are actually members of an LLP.
    I agree with the sentiment of your comment that (some of) the members of Halliwells LLP have acted badly but the law, as drafted, doesn't allow any easy remedy.
    The quality of legal opinion in the comments on this story is woeful. No wonder law firms are in the state they are in.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (19)