Textual Amendments
F1Act repealed (S.)(1.4.1996, except ss. 20(3)(5), 66) by 1995 c. 40, ss. 4, 6, 7(2), Sch. 3 Pt. II paras. 16(3), 17, Sch. 5; the repeal having effect in relation to s. 20(3)(5) on 1.4.1997 by virtue of 1995 c. 40, ss. 4, 6, Sch. 3 Pt. II para. 17, Sch. 5; 1995 c. 36, s. 105(4), Sch. 4 para. 60; S.I. 1996/3201, art. 3(7) and in relation to s. 66 on 1.8.1997 by virtue of 1997 c. 48, s. 62(1)(2), Sch. 1 para. 16, Sch. 3; S.I. 1997/1712, art. 3, Sch.
Textual Amendments
F2Act repealed (S.)(1.4.1996, except ss. 20(3)(5), 66) by 1995 c. 40, ss. 4, 6, 7(2), Sch. 3 Pt. II paras. 16(3), 17, Sch. 5; the repeal having effect in relation to s. 20(3)(5) on 1.4.1997 by virtue of 1995 c. 40, ss. 4, 6, Sch. 3 Pt. II para. 17, Sch. 5; 1995 c. 36, s. 105(4), Sch. 4 para. 60; S.I. 1996/3201, art. 3(7) and in relation to s. 66 on 1.8.1997 by virtue of 1997 c. 48, s. 62(1)(2), Sch. 1 para. 16, Sch. 3; S.I. 1997/1712, art. 3, Sch.
[F35(1)Without prejudice to the generality of any enactment contained in the Insolvency Act 1986 or in the 1985 Act, where—E+W+S
(a)any person acting as an insolvency practitioner seizes or disposes of any property in relation to which his functions are, because that property is for the time being subject to a restraint order, not exercisable; and
(b)at the time of the seizure or disposal he believes, and has reasonable grounds for believing, that he is entitled (whether in pursuance of a court order or otherwise) to seize or dispose of that property,
he shall not be liable to any person in respect of any loss or damage resulting from the seizure or disposal except in so far as the loss or damage is caused by the insolvency practitioner’s negligence; and the insolvency practitioner shall have a lien on the property, or the proceeds of its sale, for such of his expenses as were incurred in connection with the liquidation, sequestration or other proceedings in relation to which the seizure or disposal purported to take place and for so much of his remuneration as may reasonably be assigned for his actings in connection with those proceedings.
(2)Any person who, acting as an insolvency practitioner, incurs expenses—
(a)in respect of such realisable property as is mentioned in sub-paragraph (1)(a) above and in so doing does not know and has no reasonable grounds to believe that the property is for the time being subject to a restraint order; or
(b)other than in respect of such realisable property as is so mentioned, being expenses which, but for the effect of a restraint order, might have been met by taking possession of and realising the property,
shall be entitled (whether or not he has seized or disposed of that property so as to have a lien under sub-paragraph (1) above) to payment of those expenses under paragraph 4(2) or (4)(a) of Schedule 3 to this Act.
(3)In the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, the expression “acting as an insolvency practitioner” shall be construed in accordance with section 388 (interpretation) of the said Act of 1986 except that for the purposes of such construction the reference in subsection (2)(a) of that section to a permanent or interim trustee in a sequestration shall be taken to include a reference to a trustee in a sequestration and subsection (5) of that section shall be disregarded; and the expression shall also comprehend the official receiver acting as receiver or manager of the property.]
Textual Amendments
F3Act repealed (S.)(1.4.1996, except ss. 20(3)(5), 66) by 1995 c. 40, ss. 4, 6, 7(2), Sch. 3 Pt. II paras. 16(3), 17, Sch. 5; the repeal having effect in relation to s. 20(3)(5) on 1.4.1997 by virtue of 1995 c. 40, ss. 4, 6, Sch. 3 Pt. II para. 17, Sch. 5; 1995 c. 36, s. 105(4), Sch. 4 para. 60; S.I. 1996/3201, art. 3(7) and in relation to s. 66 on 1.8.1997 by virtue of 1997 c. 48, s. 62(1)(2), Sch. 1 para. 16, Sch. 3; S.I. 1997/1712, art. 3, Sch.