A statutory demand served on Mr Hurst in relation to an indemnity on partners to trustees of the lease would not be set aside because of Mr Hurst’s claims against the partnership. It was because this claim was against the partners in their capacity as such, and their claim was advanced in their capacity as trustees. Mr Hurst owed money to four trustees who held a lease for themselves, Mr Hurst and fifteen other former partners. The trustees’ statutory demand was not subject to Mr Hurst’s cross-demand against his nineteen other former partners. The amount due to the four trustees was due to them personally whereas any amount due to Mr Hurst was due to him from all the other partners jointly. Where a debt constitutes a trust obligation there can be no set off against that amount for want of mutuality.
Judges:
Arden LJ
Citations:
[2001] 2 BCLC 290, [2001] EWCA Civ 1398, [2002] BPIR 102
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Bryce Ashworth v Newnote Ltd CA 27-Jul-2007
The appellant challenged a refusal to set aside a statutory demand, in respect of his director’s loan account with the respondent company, saying the court should have accepted other accounts to set off against that debt.
Held: A statutory . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Insolvency, Trusts
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.218427