Product details

By continuing to use our site you consent to the use of cookies as described in our privacy policy unless you have disabled them.
You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.

Abstract

This is the second of a two-case series (199-001-1 and 199-002-1).This case describes the events over a six-month period to June 1995 following an emergency meeting at which a deterioration in the trading and financial position of the company has been addressed. The Board of Directors face the prospect of the company being placed in receivership unless they can restore bank confidence in their ability to halt the firm's decline. Further setbacks arise. Two reports are commissioned to investigate the firms' prospects of survival, but conflicting opinions are received. The task for the Board is to decide upon an action plan to safeguard the company's future. Can it survive, or is receivership inevitable? The teaching objectives of this case are to: (1) present an opportunity for students to consider alternative courses of action to secure the company's future; (2) explain the differences between a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) and receivership; (3) provide an insight into the motivation of bankers in preferring receivership to a CVA; (4) provoke debate about professional ethics; (5) raise awareness of bank society evaluations in a receivership situation; and (6) encourage students to consider reasons for the company's failure. This case was written with the support of a Philip Law Scholarship awarded by The Case Centre.
Location:
Size:
GBP8 million turnover, 180 employees
Other setting(s):
1992-1995

About

Abstract

This is the second of a two-case series (199-001-1 and 199-002-1).This case describes the events over a six-month period to June 1995 following an emergency meeting at which a deterioration in the trading and financial position of the company has been addressed. The Board of Directors face the prospect of the company being placed in receivership unless they can restore bank confidence in their ability to halt the firm's decline. Further setbacks arise. Two reports are commissioned to investigate the firms' prospects of survival, but conflicting opinions are received. The task for the Board is to decide upon an action plan to safeguard the company's future. Can it survive, or is receivership inevitable? The teaching objectives of this case are to: (1) present an opportunity for students to consider alternative courses of action to secure the company's future; (2) explain the differences between a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) and receivership; (3) provide an insight into the motivation of bankers in preferring receivership to a CVA; (4) provoke debate about professional ethics; (5) raise awareness of bank society evaluations in a receivership situation; and (6) encourage students to consider reasons for the company's failure. This case was written with the support of a Philip Law Scholarship awarded by The Case Centre.

Settings

Location:
Size:
GBP8 million turnover, 180 employees
Other setting(s):
1992-1995

Related