BTI 2014 LLC (Appellant) v Sequana SA and others (Respondents)
Case ID: UKSC 2019/0046
Whether the trigger for the directors’ duty to consider creditors is merely a real risk of, as opposed to a probability of or close proximity to, insolvency.
Sequana’s subsidiary was liable to indemnify BAT for costs arising from the clean-up of a polluted river. The directors of the subsidiary resolved that it should pay a substantial dividend to Sequana, without – BAT says – leaving enough money in the subsidiary to pay for the clean-up costs.
BTI 2014 LLC
- Sequana SA
- Antoine Courteault
- Pierre Martinet
- Clive Mountford
- Martin Newell
- Selarl C Basse
Lord Reed, Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Kitchin
Hearing start date
4 May 2021
Hearing finish date
5 May 2021
|04 May 2021||Morning session||Afternoon session|
|05 May 2021||Morning session||Afternoon session|
Future Judgment Update
Please note that appeal in the matter of BTI 2014 LLC (Appellant) v Sequana SA and others (Respondents) has been heard by the Supreme Court and is currently awaiting judgment.
As soon as the judgment hand-down date is confirmed, it will be published on the Future judgments page of this website. As a very broad indication, judgments tend to follow between three to nine months after the conclusion of the appeal hearing, although in some cases it may be earlier than that. Information about judgment hand-downs is usually announced one week in advance. We are unable to give any indication of the likely hand-down date for judgments not listed on the Future judgments page.