This involves a comparison of what the Receivers achieved by auctioning the property and the alternative of negotiating and perhaps concluding a contract with Mr Hunter or K Hunter and Sons Limited. What strikes one from reading section 91(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 is that it gives the Court in appropriate circumstances a power to order the sale of property. It is only if one takes into account both contracts that one gets an aggregate price of 1.55 million. We have discussed paragraph 3. MR HUNTER: Do you have the power to ban me from public footpaths? 31. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Right. Those changes are initialled; the initials appears to be those of Mr Hunter and his wife, the latter acting on behalf of K Hunter and Sons Limited. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: And even if I do not give you permission to go to them you are free to go to them and tell them all about it and they will do what is appropriate. Because he is unable to perform them they will not be performed and title will be available to be transferred to Mr Taylor's company. It said: "The property is not vacant, there is a 60 strong beef cattle herd currently on the property. National Crime Agency v Dong; National Westminster Bank v Jones; National Westminster Bank Plc v Morgan; National Provincial Bank v Ainsworth; Neale v Willis; They agreed, subject to a legal charge on . In relation to the contract relating to Manor Farm, in addition to the change of date there is one further change, that is the purchase price, which had previously been 922,500, has been revised to 1,542,500. In that correspondence it seemed to be common ground that K Hunter and Sons Limited or Mr Hunter were not in a position to pay the full amount of the purchase price at or around that time, indeed it would be necessary for an unspecified part of the purchase price to remain outstanding on mortgage for 12 months. The Receivers have actually got the maps, sir. We would also like to set optional cookies to improve our site and bring you more . Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking for. National Westminster Bank PLC v Spectrum Plus Ltd (2004) Summary. That state of affairs has come about because Mr Hunter has continued to act unlawfully by having his cattle on the land, no doubt seeking to make a nuisance of himself and no doubt hoping that he will interfere with the contract for sale in favour of Mr Taylor's company. Jurisdiction code: Breach of Contract, Disability Discrimination, Maternity and Pregnancy Rights, Sex Discrimination. The Claimant claimed damages . The auction contract identifies further terms which apply to this sale. Formal demands by the bank for payment were made in 1992 and there were intermittent payments by the husband until January 1993, after which he was declared bankrupt. It provided for payment of a deposit of 1. Mr Hunter told me that the amount of money to be borrowed from UK Farm Finance Limited was not less than 1.55 million. Found National Westminster Bank Plc v Hunter & Anor useful? That means section 12 applies. Unfortunately, based on what I have seen, the possibility of contempt of Court and committal proceedings does appear to be a real one and in the circumstances I am persuaded that I should make the order making committal proceedings operate more smoothly than might otherwise be the case. Mr Hunter had said in correspondence and has made it clear at the hearing today that the application which he makes is pursuant to the Court's power conferred by section 91(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925. If the matter had come before the Court before the auction sale, in theory at any rate, the Court could consider an application to restrain the Receivers from selling the land. 0.00%. Their payments fell into arrears and the building society started proceedings for repossession. The immediate difficulty created by those contracts for Mr Hunter is that Mr Hunter was not then and has not since been in a position to redeem the bank's charge. Because, of course, first of all the application would be considered on paper and then Mr Hunter would have a possible right to renew his application orally. Using IBAN since United Kingdom has officially introduced the IBAN system in April 2001. National Westminster Bank Ltd v Halesowen Presswork & Assemblies Ltd [1972] AC 785 is a decision of the House of Lords in relation to a banker's right to combine accounts under English law. 51. But for today's purposes all I need to record is that it is not necessary for me to form a view whether the contracts with K Hunter and Sons Limited of 14th July 2011 came into existence before the land was knocked down at auction or after that date. But the land has been sold by contract to Mr Taylor's company. The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a . Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Griffiths, Lord Oliver of Aylemton, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle. The consequence of that will be that the only contract that Mr Hunter is able to perform is the one in favour of Mr Taylor's company. It would necessarily follow that if that order were to be made that Mr Hunter would be able to make title free from the charge to K Hunter and Sons Limited, so the intervention of the Court would free Mr Hunter from the legal difficulty he is otherwise under. 2 pages) Ask a question National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Ltd and others [2005] UKHL 41 Toggle Table of Contents Table of Contents. NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PLC NWBD Company page - Search stock, chart, recent trades, company information, trading information, company news, fundamentals. In my judgment it is clear that Mr Hunter has been and remains a person interested in the right of redemption. National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Ltd and others [2005] UKHL 41 Practical Law Case Page D-000-1223 (Approx. MR HUNTER: One strikes the mind, sir. MR HUNTER: So what are you asking for? I mean, he is entitled to seek to get permission from the Court of Appeal where he will say that what has happened here has been grotesquely unfair, so I am not going to stop him saying things like that. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: All right. But possession and control do not turn upon ownership, one man can be the owner and another can be in possession and a third can have control. I have been shown a number of authorities on the operation of section 91(2). If I made an order in Mr Hunter's favour under section 91(2) whereby Mr Hunter sold the land to K Hunter and Sons Limited I would place Mr Hunter in breach of contract in favour of Mr Taylor's company. 24. The Receivers submit that they did the right thing by putting the property up for auction and getting the best bid at auction. So shall we talk about the first and start with you, Miss Windsor? As a not-for-profit member organisation, the aim of National Hunter is to work together to prevent fraud for our members and at the same time to protect victims of fraud. 42. I will consider the effect of these contracts without regard to the impact of section 91(2) and the I will consider the possible impact of the statutory provision. This is also applied in National Westminster Bank v Hunter. You have done this with full knowledge that I am still in possession of Manor Farm, Pitchcott. Under these contracts Mr Hunter is the seller and K Hunter and Sons Limited, the company controlled by Mrs Hunter, is the buyer. Citing: Applied - Henderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843. P If the buyer sought specific performance the buyer would be entitled to take title to the property, but because the property is charged with a debt of 2.5 million or more the buyer would not pay the purchase price to Mr Hunter but would instead have a substantial claim for damages in addition to the remedy of specific performance. The funds were available for draw down as at 14th July 2011.". Mr Hunter, of course, will not be released from his covenant to pay the remainder of the debt. If the buyer had sought specific performance the buyer would be entitled to take title subject to the charges, but would have a claim in damages against Mr Hunter. Nestle v National Westminster Bank: ChD 1988. National Westminster Bank Plc (1968-date), established in London, is part of NatWest Group. So that is the order. Can I appeal that you're only giving me two weeks as a litigant in person to appeal, sir? MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Yes. By section 352 of the Act of 1985: " (1) Every company shall keep a register of its members and enter in it the particulars required by this section. At this hearing that is the only document before the Court which gives any information about the possibility of funding to K Hunter and Sons Limited in relation to a possible purchase of the land for 1.55 million. . The bank appointed Receivers in relation to all of the charged property on 14th January 2010. Prima facie, if the same person enters into two contracts for the sale of the same piece of land both contracts are binding in the law of contract, although there is a plain inconsistency between them and the Court may have to determine what remedies to give to which purchaser and in what circumstances. For every 1,000 home finance loans that we had outstanding, we received five complaints. So although the contract exists or the pair of contracts exist, the legal position is as I have attempted to describe it. The wife got the family home as a life interest and a tax free annuity. I do not know if I have power to stop you attaching a penal notice, but whether I am right or wrong about that, this is an order the Court makes, it is a mandatory order, which is slightly different from a negative order, but penal notices can attach to a mandatory order. Taxpayer stake in Natwest reduced again as government sells shares. MISS WINDSOR: If Mr Hunter would like the three cattle herded through the gate, as he herded the other 87 through, onto his brother's land the Receivers will arrange for the three cattle to be handed over at the gate at that point. Mr Hunter has himself prepared a chronology which he has placed before me. That condition is in extra special condition 11 which is in these terms: "11.1, the condition will be satisfied on the date that the seller has informed the buyer that the cattle that were on the lot as at the date of the auction as shown on the sale of memorandum, the auction date, has been removed. There is an effective contract by Mr Hunter to sell to Mr Taylor's company. True it is that Mr Hunter owns the cattle, the bank does not own the cattle and does not have a security interest in the cattle. Decision date: 6 May 2021. It may be convenient at this point before considering the application of section 91(2) to that state of affairs to investigate a matter which has been very much in dispute in the course of argument. Confirmation statement filters Accounts Capital Charges Confirmation statements . Shares were issued on the sending of the allotment letter, not when the shares came to be registered in the company's books. Nothing of that kind was put before the bank prior to the auction taking place and nothing of that kind has been put before the Court today. In this context Miss Windsor cited a passage from Fisher and Lightwood's Law of Mortgage, 13th edition, paragraph 30.38. For all those reasons I reach the conclusion that this application under section 91(2) must be dismissed. It was paid by cheque and the cheque has cleared. Let me see what Mr Hunter says about those two matters and his application for permission. 66. Pursuant to the negotiations with Mr Hunter on 14th July 2011, some at least of the purchase price, perhaps a substantial part of the purchase price, was to be postponed for a 12 month period. MISS WINDSOR: [inaudible] the first sentence application for permission to appeal----. If there is no point----, MR HUNTER: If I want to move the cattle, sir, how can I move the cattle if----. By clicking on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the attorneys appearing in this matter. . Swift codes also known as BIC Codes is a unique bank identifier used to verify financial transactions such as a Bank Wire Transfer. Currently, both domestic bank account numbers and IBAN are in circulation. That was a case, different from the present case, where the mortgagor suffering from severe negative equity wished to see the property sold and bring to an end the ongoing liability to pay interest, but the mortgagee did not intend to exercise its power of sale and did not wish to see the property sold at that point in the market. 3. I can see in detail what the parties said to each other because they said it in writing in documents sent by e-mail which have been produced in evidence. 49. It is also the case that there have been further applications to the Court and eventually Mr and Mrs Hunter did leave the land, that is they ceased to reside on any part of the land or buildings. In the course of his submissions to me today Mr Hunter questioned the bank's entitlement to appoint those Receivers. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: And that is to be without prejudice to any powers you would have to recover costs----. Insofar as the bank seeks an order for sale under section 13 of the Torts (Interference of goods) Act 1977 the point made by Mr Hunter is first that the cattle which are on the land and which might, in breach of the Court orders, in the future be brought onto the land are not "goods" for the purpose of the 1977 Act. The mortgagor does not need an order of the Court to force the mortgagee to sell the property, the mortgagee has been taking active steps to sell the property and has got the benefit of a contract under which it will sell the property. Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature. Ethan Crane . MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Which bit of it do you want to appeal? During the afternoon of 14th July 2011 the firm of Allsops, well-known surveyors and auctioneers, auctioned the land at The Park Lane Hotel, Piccadilly, London, W1. Mr Hunter says that the cattle are in his possession, they are under his control, they are not in the possession of the bank, they are not under the control of the bank. There is no application before me today for any relief in relation to what happened in relation to Kirkdene and it is not necessary for me to go into that matter any further or say anything about it. Millett LJ gave a short judgment agreeing with that of Phillips LJ and the third member of the court, Butler-Sloss LJ, agreed. 34. There is no application before the Court today to have the appointment set aside or to have the Receivers removed. It is fair to say that the impression given by the two chronologies is somewhat different. You will just have to be patient a little longer. Then there is the question of funding. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Well, let me see. Use our proprietary AI tool CaseIQ to find other relevant judgments with just one click. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: But you are in very considerable need of capable legal advice not later than tomorrow morning I would suggest to get on with this. 81. Shall we just work out the agenda? MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Some of these orders are going to take effect immediately, some are going to take effect tomorrow. Secondly, I will order that by a very early point, which will be 4 p.m. on Thursday, 24th November 2011, that Mr Hunter deliver to the bank and/or the Receivers all existing cattle passports and all other relevant documentation spelt out in the draft order that relate to the cattle. Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this 3. 142.75. However, the comparison ceases to be favourable to Mr Hunter from that point. 90. Those proceedings were started in the Aylesbury County Court by a claim form dated 29th June 2010. Under the auction contract the full balance of the purchase price is payable on completion. Section 91(2) is in these terms: "In any action, whether for foreclosure or for redemption or for sale or for the raising and payment in any manner of mortgage money, the Court on the request of the mortgagee or of any person interested either in the mortgage money or in the right of redemption and notwithstanding that (a) any other person dissents or (b) the mortgagee or any person so interested does not appear in the action and without allowing any time for redemption or for payment of any mortgage money, may direct a sale of a mortgaged property on such terms as it thinks fit, including the deposit in court of a reasonable sum fixed by the Court to meet the expenses of sale and to secure performance of the terms.". 88. Nor can I change the position in Mr Hunter's favour by granting some relief by way of injunction or otherwise against the Receivers. GORDON FRANCIS PELL, director, 1 Feb 2000 - 31 Mar 2010. MISS WINDSOR: This is the first I have heard of it. The contracts appear to be in essentially the same terms apart from the identity of the land and the price. I say that because this case does not turn upon which contract is first in time. Thereafter she was absolutely entitled to the . That of course does not take from him his equity of redemption. Listing NGR: SE2637427830 I can only give permission if I am satisfied that you have a real prospect of success in the Court of Appeal or there is some other reason why this case should be considered by the Court of Appeal. The husband asked the claimant bank to refinance the loan. National Westminster Bank v Morgan [1985] AC 686: Exploitation Cases: Lloyds Bank v Bundy [1975] QB 326: Exploitation Cases: Portman Buliding Society v Dusangh [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 221: Exploitation Cases: Boustany v Pigott [1995] 69 P & CR 298: Exploitation Cases: Hart v O'Connor [1985] AC 1000: Exploitation Cases: Alec Lobb (Garages) v . If you are to get any modification of these orders you will have to in your own interests act extremely quickly. The contract provides for title to pass to the purchaser pursuant to a Land Registry transfer form, in form TR2, which is to be executed by National Westminster Bank Plc as transferor pursuant to the legal charges. 39. Click here to remove this judgment from your profile. The last outstanding life interest under the trust was that of her father John, who died in 1986. Bank. Citation. Clause 8.1.A reads: "The seller will sell the property free from incumbencies other than any matters other than the charge contained in the land registry entries." A charge over book debts in a debenture which required the proceeds of the book debts to be paid into an account with the bank but placed no restriction on the use that could be made of the balance on the account thereafter was a floating and not a fixed charge, Siebe Gorman & Co Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd (1979) 2 Lloyd's . It seems to me incumbent on the mortgagor to seek from the High Court any relief which that Court is empowered to give before the possession warrant takes effect.". The other differences between the two contracts favour the auction contract over the suggested position with K Hunter and Sons Limited. 89. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: In practical terms one of the real, real problems about appeals is the transcript of the judgment. Brief history This joint stock bank was established in Southwark in 1836 as Surrey, Kent & Sussex Banking Co. It is not necessary I think to go to every difference and attempt to resolve it. The difficulties of a practical kind which are being encountered are described in detail in the evidence which has been put in on behalf of the bank. 41. National Westminster Bank (A/K/A NatWest Bank) is a fully-owned subsidiary of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group, which in March 2000, completed the acquisition of NatWest Bank. Read the full decision in Mrs L . Do you want to say anything about the points of details save for the general points? This case concerns agricultural land and buildings at Manor Farm, Pitchcott, Aylesbury and at Kirkdene, Pitchcott, Aylesbury. MISS WINDSOR: I invite you to make the order as drafted, save at paragraph 3 (ii) be replaced by some machinery for Mr Hunter to sign the draft as handed up to your Lordship instead. This time the contracts provide for the property to be sold for 1.55 million, but the debt secured by the charge over the properties is again, roughly speaking, 2.5 million to 3 million. Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Custom 300 Wsm Ar Upper, Articles N