A “statement made in pursuance of a requirement” within s.433(1)(b) Insolvency Act 1986 was a statement elicited by questions that might result in proceedings for contempt of court if not answered. On the facts, statements made by the defendant in response to questions from administrative receivers were inadmissible in criminal proceedings against him.

The receivers’ primary duty was to try and bring about a situation where the interest on the secured debt could be paid and the debt itself repaid. Exploiting the vulnerability of a customer that sourced most of its parts from the company was doing just that and was acting properly.