Voidable transactions

Apart from petitions by the company or creditors, an administrator has the power to move a company into liquidation, carrying out an asset sale, if its attempts at rescue come to an end.[145] If the liquidator is not an administrator, he is appointed by the court usually on the nomination of the majority of creditors.[146] The liquidator can be removed by the same groups.[147] Once in place, the liquidator has the power to do anything set out in sections 160, 165 and Schedule 4 for the purpose of its main duty. This includes bringing legal claims that belonged to the company. This is to realise the value of the company, and distribute the assets. Assets must always be distributed in the order of statutory priority: releasing the claims of fixed security interest holders, paying preferential creditors (the liquidator's expenses, employees and pensions, and the ring fenced fund for unsecured creditors),[148] the floating charge holder, unsecured creditors, deferred debts, and finally shareholders.[149] In the performance of these basic tasks, the liquidator owes its duties to the company, not individual creditors or shareholders.[150] They can be liable for breach of duty by exercising powers for improper purposes (e.g. not distributing money to creditors in the right order,[151]) and may be sued additionally for negligence.[152] As a person in a fiduciary position, he may have no conflict of interest or make secret profits. Nevertheless, liquidators (like administrators and some receivers) can generally be said to have a broad degree of discretion about the conduct of liquidation. They must realise assets to distribute to creditors, and they may attempt to maximise these by bringing new litigation, either to avoid transactions entered into by the insolvent company, or by suing the former directors.
Increasing assets
Litigation by administrators and liquidators may avoid unfair transactions or preferences, and make former directors pay for wrongdoing. But because of a cautious culture, accountants bring few claims.

If a company has gone into an insolvency procedure, one of the objectives of the administrator or liquidator is to increase the assets that are available to distribute to creditors. To ensure fairness and to treat creditors with similar claims equally, UK law creates significant exceptions to some fundamental private law doctrines. The freedom to contract for any consideration, adequate or not,[153] is curtailed as transactions for an undervalue, or anything unregistered or after presentation of a winding up petition may be avoided.[154] The freedom to contract for any security interest[155] is restricted, as a company's attempt to give an undue preference to one creditor over another, particularly a floating charge for no new money, or any charge that is not registered can also be unwound.[156] Furthermore, particularly since the Cork Report's emphasis on increasing the accountability of company directors, practitioners may sue directors by summary procedure for breach of duties, especially negligence or conflicts of interest. Encroaching on limited liability and separate personality,[157] a specific, insolvency related claim was created in 1986 named wrongful trading, so if a director failed to put a company into an insolvency procedure, and ran up extra debts, when a reasonable director would have, he can be made liable to contribute to the company's assets. Any intentional wrongdoing and fraud is always dealt with strictly, yet a variety of claims exist without any such proof so as prevent unjust enrichment of selected creditor at others' expense and deter wrongdoing.
Voidable transactions