Report comment

I’m guessing and I’m not an accountant: it should be clearer when the administration documents are filed at Companies House.

The prize was an international practice. When Gordon Dadds found out that they weren’t getting that, but only London (plus a few referral arrangements), they looked a bit harder at the London practice. I suspect there are more firms which would technically be insolvent if you added up all the future lease liabilities.

It won’t make law firms so attractive as commercial tenants, so it may have wider impact, but they’re not the first. (Remember Halliwells...)

I don’t think limited liability is unreasonable in principle in an era when we are supposed to be businesses. But It does merit keeping an eye on it for potential abuse. I hasten to add that I am not suggesting this is an abuse.