11.—(1) In Article 236 (challenge of meeting’s decision), in paragraph (2)—
(a)for sub-paragraph (b) substitute—
“(b)a person who—
(i)was entitled, in accordance with the rules, to vote at the creditors' meeting, or
(ii)would have been so entitled if he had had notice of it,”,
(b)in sub-paragraph (c), for “230(3)(a)” substitute “230(3), 230A(4)”.
(2) In paragraph (3) of that Article—
(a)after “be made” insert “(a)”,
(b)at the end insert
“or
(b)in the case of a person who was not given notice of the creditor’s meeting, after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day on which he became aware that the meeting had taken place,
but (subject to that) an application made by a person within paragraph (2)(b)(ii) on the ground that the arrangement prejudices his interests may be made after the arrangement has ceased to have effect, unless it has come to an end prematurely.”.