Moosey,At this stage it is the creditors who have resisted...

Moosey,

At this stage it is the creditors who have resisted appointing a liquidator, as they must feel that there is better value to be obtained in Administration than liquidation. Of course one has to wonder why, given that the Company is de-listed the shell, previously as far as I could see the only jewel in the crown, now has no or very little value. The only other thing could be the sale of individual patents or perhaps in one go, but given that most of these have very little life left this could be grasping at straws. Also remember that someone is paying the Administrators costs, and given that he is well aware of the level of recovery, he is not going to let this go on for too long. If the Administrator had any concerns regarding procrastination (perhaps the previous Directors are still around) or he is becoming a large creditor, he could move to appoint a liquidator himself.

Given that they had previously tried to sell the IP, and the Company, to any party who may had any interest, why would they not do the same? Acknowledging, of course that there may some parties who have an interest but due to security concerns can't buy.

As regards litigation, you should be aware that if a liquidator finds any wrong doing by the management of a company he can commence litigation on his own. However, as regards actions by Shareholders I suspect that some of us probably are prepared to draw a line in the sand as regards good money after bad.