Lisa Feng

Call 2011

Photo of Lisa Feng


Lisa practices in all aspects of personal and corporate insolvency. She is regularly instructed to act for office holders and respondents in relation to various claims under the Insolvency Act such as misfeasance claims, setting aside transactions defrauding creditors, transactions at an undervalue and preferences. She has extensive experience in assisting with difficult applications. For example, she advised and acted for a bankrupt in a successful application under section 303 of the Insolvency Act to compel a trustee in bankruptcy to conclude a bankruptcy and a further application to significantly reduce their remuneration.

Lisa also appears regularly in the applications list in the Business and Property Courts where she has ample experience in dealing with matters such as administration applications, remuneration applications and administration extensions. Lisa is able to deal with more complex points under the Insolvency Act including for example, advising and appearing a recent line of cases involving the defective appointment of administrators including the case of Re A.R.G. (Mansfield) Ltd [2020] EWHC 1133 (Ch).

Recently, Lisa has developed much experience during the pandemic in dealing remotely with urgent applications and substantial trials.

Lisa has recently been appointed Junior Counsel to the Crown by the Attorney General (Regional Panel B).

Insolvency Cases

  • Acting for directors and administrators in an application to regularise a defective appointment due to the lack of FCA consent: Gregory & Others v A.R.G. Mansfield Limited (In Administration) [2020] EWHC 1133:
  • M v K: Acting on behalf of a bankrupt in a complex application to compel a trustee to conclude a 6-year bankruptcy pursuant to section 303 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and for permission to challenge remuneration and expenses.
  • F v G: Successfully acting for a liquidator in a 2-day trial in respect of claims against a director for breach of duty, wrongful trading and payments of unlawful dividends.
  • A v L: Resisting an application to set aside a statutory demand which was issued for over £800,000 as sums due under a personal guarantee. Case involved consideration of commissions and clawbacks in contracts with insurance intermediaries.
  • W v L: Successfully resisting an application to set aside a statutory demand for sums due under a personal guarantee. Case involved analysis of technical legal points surrounding whether the applicant could be estopped from challenging the guarantee on the basis that it had not been properly witnessed and consideration of the principles in Shah v Shah [2001] EWCA Civ 527.