Re Millstream Recycling Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Miss Justice Laffoy
• Judgment Date: 26 March 2010
• Neutral Citation: [2010] IEHC 106
• Docket Number: 684 COS/2009
• Court: High Court
• Date: 26 March 2010

Millstream Recycling Ltd, In Re

IN THE MATTER OF MILLSTREAM RECYCLING LIMITED

AND

IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACTS 1963 -2009

AND

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY MILLSTREAM RECYCLING LIMITED PURSUANT TO SECTION 201 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1963

[2010] IEHC 106

684 COS/2009

THE HIGH COURT

COMPANY LAW

Practice and procedure

Scheme of arrangement - Claim cut off date - Creditors - Whether court had jurisdiction to extend time for claim to be submitted - Companies Act 1963 (No 33), s 201 - Rules of the Superior Courts 1986 (SI 15/1986), O 122, r 7 - Application refused (2009/684COS - Laffoy J - 26/3/2010) [2010] IEHC 106

In re Millstream Recycling Ltd

Facts The applicant (Staunton Food Limited) brought the present application seeking an order for the extension of time under which it could lodge a claim for compensation/damages to a particular Scheme. It was alleged that the company (Millstream Recycling Limited) had been responsible for the supply of contaminated feed into the agricultural sector, as a result of which it had suffered losses. As a result of the contamination event a Scheme of Arrangement was being put in place. The applicant submitted that it attempted to submit a claim to the Scheme Manager but was informed that the cut-off date had passed and the claim could not be accepted.

Held by Laffoy J in declining the grant the application. The Court did not have any jurisdiction to interfere with the implementation of the steps leading up to holding of the creditors'' meetings. Order 122, rule 7 of the Rules of the Superior Courts, 1986 did not confer jurisdiction on the court to grant the extension of time sought.

Reporter: R.F.

COMPANIES ACT 1963 S201(1)

COMPANIES ACT 1963 S201(3)

COMPANIES ACT 1963 S201(2)

COMPANIES ACT 1963 S202

RSC O.122 r7

Miss Justice Laffoy

1 Staunton Foods Limited (the applicant) has brought this application in existing proceedings brought by Millstream Recycling Limited (the company) seeking relief under s. 201(1) of the Companies Act1963 (the Act of 1963). I gave judgment in the proceedings on 23^rd December, 2009 that, subject to the company filing a supplemental affidavit as specified, which was done, the following orders would be made:

2 (a) an order pursuant to s. 201(1) that meetings of two separate classes of creditors of the company be summoned to consider proposals for a Scheme of Arrangement;

3 (b) if the Scheme is approved by the requisite majorities, an order that the petition seeking the sanction of the Court for the Scheme pursuant to s. 201(3) be heard on Monday, 19^th July, 2010 at 2pm; and

4 (c) an order pursuant to s. 201(2) staying all proceedings and restraining further proceedings against the company for damages in relation to claims against the company arising out of a contamination event, as defined in the Scheme of Arrangement, until further order of the Court.

5 2. The Scheme as amended and dated 13^th January, 2010, which was subsequently advertised, provided, in clause 11.9 that all claims in the prescribed form should be submitted to the Expert (identified in the Scheme), care of the Scheme Manager (as identified in the Scheme), on or before 12^th February, 2010 or as directed by the Court. Clause 11.15 of the Scheme, headed "Claim Cut-off Date", provided as follows:

"This will be 12^th February, 2010 or such date as may be directed by the Court. Scheme creditors who have not submitted a prescribed Creditor Claim Form by the Claim Cut-off Date will be deemed to have no claim and any claims received after that date, whether on a prescribed Claim Form or not, will be unenforceable."

6 No alternative Claim Cut-off Date has been directed by the Court.

3. On this application the applicant seeks either -

7 (i) an order extending the time for the applicant to submit a claim for compensation/damages against the company to the Scheme Manager, or

8 (ii) an order otherwise permitting the late submission by the applicant of a claim for compensation/damages against the company in these proceedings for consideration by the Scheme Manager.

9 4. In his affidavit sworn on 16^th March, 2010 grounding the application, Mr. Peadar Murphy, a director of the applicant, has averred that the applicant, which is engaged in meat, including pork and bacon, processing at its facility in Bandon, County Cork, has suffered substantial losses as a result of the pig feed contamination crisis in 2008 as a result of the supply by the company of contaminated feed to the market. In relation to the losses, Mr, Murphy has averred that they include loss of product, loss of market, loss of profit and the cost of a bridging loan necessitated by the contamination. The applicant has received three government compensation payments totalling almost €1.9m and has a further claim pending. Mr. Murphy averred that the...