ChD 8 December 1993. A company was in the hands of administrative receivers, the council being the petitioning creditor for a sum of £70,983.94 for unoccupied rates. The council claimed that the court should make a winding-up order because liability in respect of unpaid rates for the premises fell upon the company which was unable to pay and therefore so long as the receivership continued the rates due would remain unpaid. If a winding-up order was made then the receivers or the banks would become liable for the rates charged on the premises. Detailed evidence was given of the financial disadvantages of receivership. The council's petition was dismissed on the grounds that recovery of rates would be at the expense of the secured creditors and would cause any chance they had of reimbursement to disappear. The reason for seeking to wind up the company was not to swell the estate of the company but to gain a preference over the secured and unsecured creditors.