Citations:
[1871] SLR 9 – 169
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576176
[1871] SLR 9 – 169
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576176
[1872] SLR 9 – 250
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576180
[1871] SLR 9 – 143
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576169
[1872] SLR 9 – 217
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576179
[1871] SLR 9 – 141
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576178
[1871] SLR 9 – 160
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576168
[1871] SLR 9 – 154
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576164
[1871] SLR 9 – 176
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576174
[1871] SLR 9 – 174
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576170
[1871] SLR 9 – 25
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576152
[1871] SLR 9 – 151
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576160
[1871] SLR 9 – 155
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576154
[1871] SLR 9 – 70 – 2
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576150
[1871] SLR 9 – 23
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576148
[1871] SLR 9 – 159
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576161
[1871] SLR 9 – 156 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576155
[1871] SLR 9 – 157
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576157
[1871] SLR 9 – 114 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576151
[1871] SLR 9 – 106
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576146
[1871] SLR 9 – 158
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576158
[1871] SLR 9 – 168
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576159
[1871] SLR 9 – 148
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576162
[1871] SLR 9 – 88
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576143
[1871] SLR 9 – 61
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576147
[1871] SLR 9 – 31
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576144
[1871] SLR 9 – 129
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576149
[1871] SLR 9 – 128
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576145
[1871] SLR 9 – 56
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576153
[1871] SLR 9 – 140 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576156
[1871] SLR 9 – 41
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576142
[1871] SLR 9 – 73
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576129
[1871] SLR 9 – 72
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576136
[1871] SLR 9 – 74
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576135
[1871] SLR 9 – 100
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576123
[1871] SLR 9 – 95
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576140
[1871] SLR 9 – 132
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576131
[1871] SLR 9 – 146
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576124
[1871] SLR 9 – 44
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576127
[1871] SLR 9 – 42
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576138
[1871] SLR 9 – 112
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576130
[1871] SLR 9 – 51
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576137
[1871] SLR 9 – 33
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576132
[1871] SLR 9 – 92
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576125
[1871] SLR 9 – 60
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576126
[1871] SLR 9 – 39
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576133
[1871] SLR 9 – 101
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576139
[1871] SLR 9 – 78
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576134
[1871] SLR 9 – 91
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576128
[1871] SLR 9 – 29
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576141
[1871] SLR 9 – 98
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576119
[1871] SLR 9 – 22
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576111
[1871] SLR 9 – 36
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576122
[1871] SLR 9 – 85
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576118
[1871] SLR 9 – 114
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576114
[1871] SLR 9 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576107
[1871] SLR 9 – 102
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576116
[1871] SLR 9 – 14
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576110
[1871] SLR 9 – 18
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576105
[1871] SLR 9 – 20
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576112
[1871] SLR 9 – 124
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576113
[1871] SLR 9 – 17
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576108
[1871] SLR 9 – 3 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576109
[1871] SLR 9 – 27
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576106
[1871] SLR 9 – 86
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576120
[1871] SLR 9 – 89
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576117
[1871] SLR 9 – 83
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576121
[1871] SLR 9 – 101 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576115
[1871] SLR 9 – 49
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576103
[1871] SLR 9 – 3
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576104
[1871] SLR 8 – 626
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576102
(Extra Division Inner House) The liquidator sought to have set aside the sale of a substantial hotel with golf courses on the basis that it was at an undervalue, with the buyer being aware of the seller’s potential insolvency. He appealed against a finding that the buyer had also assumed debts sufficient to give full value.
Held: The Lord Ordinary had erred in law. He had made no finding that the assumption of the debts had occurred with the sale so as to become part of the consideration, and without that finding, he had not been entitled to hold that the alienation of the property had been made for adequate consideration or, given the knowledge of the circumstances, that Foxworth had obtained the standard security in good faith. Moreover, the Lord Ordinary had not given satisfactory reasons for his conclusions and the issue was therefore at large for the appellate court. On the evidence before it, it was now held that the sale had been a gratuitous alienation, and that Foxworth had not obtained its rights under the standard security in good faith or for value. Decree was therefore granted for the reduction of the standard security.
Lady Paton said: ‘The consideration allegedly given in exchange for the granting of the disposition of Letham Grange to NSL required to be enforceable (ie able to be vindicated) at the time when the disposition was granted on 12 February 2001. On the Lord Ordinary’s own findings, however, there was no enforceable obligation binding NSL to repay Liu family loans as at that date. Taken in context, I am quite unable to read the words ‘part of the loan’ in the penultimate line of para 90 of the Lord Ordinary’s opinion as being referable to the precise or calculated figure of andpound;1.85 million but, even if they were so read, I doubt whether, in the absence of any documentation whatsoever, the ‘decision’ in question could properly be regarded as any more than a statement of intent on the part of Mr Liu. . . It was not open to the Lord Ordinary to accept that consideration was given in exchange for the disposition granted in the form of some vague obligation undertaken by NSL to repay Liu family debt.’
Lady Paton
[2013] ScotCS CSIH – 13, 2013 SLT 445
Scotland
Opinion – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd SCS 12-Apr-2011
Outer House – The pursuer was liquidator of a Company, suing for declarator that ‘the pretended standard security’ granted by the second defenders in favour of the first defenders in respect of subjects was void and unenforceable; and for production . .
Costs at Outer House – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd and Another SCS 17-Jun-2011
The court having assoilzied the defendant in the claim now considered an application for costs. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.471308
Outer House – The pursuer was liquidator of a Company, suing for declarator that ‘the pretended standard security’ granted by the second defenders in favour of the first defenders in respect of subjects was void and unenforceable; and for production and reduction of that pretended standard security.
Held: The sale had been made for adequate consideration. The price recorded in the disposition was far below the value of the subjects, but that price had not been the entire consideration for the sale: The buyer had also taken liability for substantial debts. The disposition was not therefore been susceptible to reduction under section 242. Foxworth had therefore obtained its rights under the standard security in good faith, and it was not liable to reduction.
Lord Glennie said: ‘It is not clear to me on the evidence when the documentation purporting to evidence the assumption of the loan by NSL was created, or indeed when the decision was made that the amount of debt assumed would be andpound;1. 85 million rather than some other figure. Mr Liu acted for both LGDC and NSL (albeit under different names) and also took the necessary decisions so far as concerned the loans from members of his family. To that extent, once the decision was made, the documentation could follow later. It was not suggested in argument that the subsequent creation of documents to record the assumption of the loan as part of the consideration for the sale in any way invalidated what had occurred if the decision had in fact been made to assume part of the loan as part of the consideration. I find that that decision had been made.’
Lord Glennie
[2011] ScotCS CSOH – 66
Scotland
Judgment – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd and Another SCS 17-Jun-2011
The court having assoilzied the defendant in the claim now considered an application for costs. . .
Opinion – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd and Another SCS 1-Mar-2013
(Extra Division Inner House) The liquidator sought to have set aside the sale of a substantial hotel with golf courses on the basis that it was at an undervalue, with the buyer being aware of the seller’s potential insolvency. He appealed against a . .
Outer House Opinion – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited and Another SC 2-Jul-2014
It was said that land, a hotal and gold courses, had been sold at an undervalue and that the transaction was void as against the seller’s liquidator.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The critical issue was whether ‘the alienation was made for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.432879
The court having assoilzied the defendant in the claim now considered an application for costs.
Lord Glennie
[2011] ScotCS CSOH – 104
Scotland
Judgment – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd SCS 12-Apr-2011
Outer House – The pursuer was liquidator of a Company, suing for declarator that ‘the pretended standard security’ granted by the second defenders in favour of the first defenders in respect of subjects was void and unenforceable; and for production . .
Costs at Outer House – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited and Another SC 2-Jul-2014
It was said that land, a hotal and gold courses, had been sold at an undervalue and that the transaction was void as against the seller’s liquidator.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The critical issue was whether ‘the alienation was made for . .
Costs at Outer House – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd and Another SCS 1-Mar-2013
(Extra Division Inner House) The liquidator sought to have set aside the sale of a substantial hotel with golf courses on the basis that it was at an undervalue, with the buyer being aware of the seller’s potential insolvency. He appealed against a . .
Cited – Henderson v Foxworth Investments Limited and Another SC 2-Jul-2014
It was said that land, a hotal and gold courses, had been sold at an undervalue and that the transaction was void as against the seller’s liquidator.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The critical issue was whether ‘the alienation was made for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.441326
[1871] SLR 8 – 639
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576099
[1871] SLR 8 – 655
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576094
[1871] SLR 8 – 625 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576098
[1871] SLR 8 – 645 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576091
[1871] SLR 8 – 669
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576093
[1871] SLR 8 – 682
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576088
[1871] SLR 8 – 627
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576095
[1871] SLR 8 – 688
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576089
[1871] SLR 8 – 660
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576097
[1871] SLR 8 – 638
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576100
[1871] SLR 8 – 656
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576096
[1871] SLR 8 – 646
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576090
[1871] SLR 8 – 640
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576092
[1871] SLR 8 – 688 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576101
[1871] SLR 8 – 629
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576071
[1871] SLR 8 – 671
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576075
[1871] SLR 8 – 633
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576084
[1871] SLR 8 – 645
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576081
[1871] SLR 8 – 586
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576068
[1871] SLR 8 – 624
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576087
[1871] SLR 8 – 623
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576072
[1871] SLR 8 – 603 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576069
[1871] SLR 8 – 636
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576074
[1871] SLR 8 – 640 – 1
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576077
[1871] SLR 8 – 674
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576073
[1871] SLR 8 – 685
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576082
[1871] SLR 8 – 634
Scotland
Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.576083