Estate claim after insolvency opens: classify supply and invoice

Section 46 no. 4 IO lists performance claims under bilateral contracts into which the insolvency administrator has entered. The review therefore needs a contract still relevant on both sides, evidenced entry and performance resulting from it. Continuation by habit is not a substitute.

Section 46 no. 5 IO covers claims arising from legal acts of the insolvency administrator. For a new post-opening order, the customer, authority, scope, price, due date and acceptance should be clear. The order must match the item actually invoiced.

The existing article on an ongoing contract in insolvency explains the administrator’s election. This article starts later and considers how requested performance and the resulting invoice should be classified.

A claim against the estate should not rest on one email or invoice alone. The file should show who acted for the estate, exactly what was ordered and when performance was supplied or accepted.

For goods, use the order, confirmation, delivery note, serial numbers and receipt. For services, use the scope, time records, interim work, approvals and acceptance. Variations should be confirmed before they are performed.

Also verify that the contact was the appointed insolvency administrator or a person with evidenced authority. The company name, case reference, invoice address and a payment statement do not alone prove authority.

An ongoing project may contain several claim groups when proceedings open. Completed work, performance continued after entry, newly ordered variations and any ownership or security rights should not be combined without review.

Create one line for each performance segment with its legal basis, period, amount, evidence and disputed point. Separate invoices may make documentation clearer, but they do not determine legal classification by themselves.

If performance was completed before opening, the specialist article on filing a claim instead of ordinary enforcement explains the separate route. The firm’s guidance on creditor representation in insolvency proceedings covers filing, review and later procedural steps.

Section 124(1) IO provides that estate creditors are to be satisfied without regard to the stage of proceedings once their claims are established and due. In practice, the legal basis, performance evidence, acceptance and contractual due date remain decisive.

Classification as an estate claim is still not a payment guarantee. If estate claims cannot be paid in full, section 47 IO provides a statutory order. Before further performance, suppliers should therefore clarify not only claim status but also the current proceedings and payment arrangements.

Advance payment, security or short billing periods may matter commercially. The arrangement that is lawful and sensible depends on the order and proceedings. This article does not recommend one universal form of security.

Before another supply, keep the court notice, administrator contact, existing contract, entry declaration or new order and precise scope of performance. List outstanding pre-opening items separately.

Record the next performance due, the counter performance owed by the estate and the acceptance or confirmation required. Where several sites, buyers or companies are involved, identify the correct legal entity.

The purpose is a reviewable decision before further costs arise. Legal analysis may show an estate claim, only an insolvency claim, or several legal bases that must be pursued separately.