| Call 2002
Reuben’s practice covers the full spectrum of both corporate and personal insolvency. He acts for office-holders, individuals, directors, and insolvent companies in both an advisory and a representative capacity. As well as acting and advising in relation to technical aspects of insolvency practice and procedure, much of Reuben’s practice involves asset recovery, and in particular undervalue, preference or misfeasance claims. Reuben has been recommended as a leading junior for insolvency in the Legal 500 since 2008 which describes him as “a master technician”.
Cases and Work of Note
- In the Matter of Hoare Capital Markets LLP (2015): Acting for Liquidators of a failed hedge fund in the recovery of overpaid entitlements in circumstances where distributions to members exceeded profits made.
- Thomas v Edmondson  EWHC 1494 (Ch);  1 WLR 1395: Acted for a Trustee in Bankruptcy in an application for an Income Payments Order. It was the first case to decide that an IPO could be made in circumstances where an Income Payments Agreement had already been made but had come to an end.
- Bibby ACF Ltd v Agate  BPIR 685: Acted for a creditor in a s.423 claim.
- In the Matter of Petroplus Marketing AG (2013) acting in a complex, international and substantial receivership concerning oil and petroleum assets. Acted for the English Receiver and advised on cross-border issues arising between the Receiver and Swiss Administrator.
- MG Rover Dealer Properties Ltd v Hunt  BCC 698: Acted for creditors and contributories of MG Rover in an application seeking to compel the liquidators of MG Rover to provide documentation which might enable a guarantor of its liabilities to challenge the guarantee liability claimed.
- Singla v Stockler  EWHC 1176 (Ch),  BPIR 1061: Acted for a liquidator seeking to restrain his former solicitors from acting for a creditor in misfeasance proceedings brought against him. The case involved issues of the extent to which the liquidator was entitled to assert confidentiality in relation to communications passing between himself and his former solicitors in litigation funded by the creditor.
- In the Matter of Tag Capital Ventures Ltd  EWHC 1171;  All ER (D) 78 (May): Acted for the victim of a boiler room fraud who had paid over £400,000 for shares in a worthless company. The issue was whether the victim had entered into a valid agreement for the purchase of shares and if so whether that agreement was vitiated by fraud.
- In the Matter of Tag Capital Ventures Ltd  EWHC 1631 (Ch);  Bus. LR D50: Successfully argued that a petitioning creditor was entitled to make use of the transcripts of a director’s s.235 interviews with provisional liquidators.
- Smith v QBE Insurance (Europe) Ltd & Ors  EWHC 3127 (Ch);  All ER (D) 111 (Dec): Acted for a creditor of an insurance broker in compulsory liquidation, in the context of disputed proprietary claims against the assets held by the liquidators. The case involved questions of issue estoppel and res victim judicata, whether the creditor could rely upon that res judicata, and the extent to which the judgment was impeachable for fraud.
- Pick v Sumpter  EWHC 685 (Ch);  BPIR 638: Acted for a trustee in bankruptcy in an appeal against the imposition of conditions on an order for possession and sale
- Watts v Newham LBC  EWHC 377 (Ch);  BPIR 718: Acted for a debtor made bankrupt on the basis of liability orders relating to tenanted properties. The case involved questions of the appropriate manner in which the liability orders ought to have been challenged and whether, in the light of the challenges made, the bankruptcy order ought to have been made or ought to have been annulled.
- Johnson v Tandridge DC  EWHC 3325 (Ch);  BPIR 405: An appeal against a bankruptcy order which addressed the correct manner in which to challenge service of the petition.
- Bassford v Patel  BPIR 1049: Acted for a trustee in bankruptcy in an application for possession and sale of a matrimonial home. The dispute concerned the extent of the trustee’s beneficial interest in the property and whether an equitable account should be taken.