Denaro v Barclays – key lessons for insolvency practitioners

Tom Taylor, Solicitor

The High Court’s decision on 4 September 2026 in Denaro (UK) Ltd v Bracken & Ors [2026] EWHC 2266 (Ch) will be of significant interest to insolvency practitioners and lenders. The claim was brought by Stephen Berry, Jason Greenhalgh, and Paul Stanley acting as liquidators for and on behalf of Denaro (UK) Limited (the “Company”). The Company is an alleged Ponzi scheme operating between 2013 and 2023. The liquidators of the Company are pursuing claims worth approximately £37.8 million against Barclays Bank UK Plc, alleging dishonest assistance and breach of the bank’s Quincecare duty on the basis.

At this stage, the Court was not asked to decide whether those allegations are true. Instead, it considered whether the claims were pleaded sufficiently clearly to continue following Barclays’ strike-out application. HHJ Cadwallader dismissed Barclays’ application and granted the liquidators permission to amend the pleadings. While HHJ Cadwallader found shortcomings in the original dishonest assistance claim, particularly regarding the knowledge attributed to an individual bank employee, the Judge concluded that those deficiencies could be remedied by amendment. The Quincecare claim also survived, with the HHJ Cadwallader accepting that the liquidators could rely on allegations that the bank acquired notice of a continuing fraudulent scheme over time.

Although no findings have yet been made on liability, the Judgment demonstrates the courts’ willingness to allow viable fraud and insolvency claims to proceed where deficiencies in the pleadings can be cured. It also serves as a reminder of the constant importance of careful and detailed pleading in any claim.