Driver v Broad: 1893

An agreement to create a floating charge counted as an interest in land. Kay LJ said that there was no distinction between a debenture which expressly gives the company liberty to dispose of the charged property ‘in the ordinary course of its business’ and one that does not. The concept was inherent in the term ‘floating security’ or ‘floating charge.’


Kay LJ


[1893] 1 QB 744

Cited by:

CitedKilcarne Holdings Ltd v Targetfollow (Birmingham) Ltd, Targetfollow Group Ltd ChD 9-Nov-2004
The defendant entered into an agreement for lease, incurring substantial obligations. When it could not meet them it sought assistance from the claimant, who now claimed to have an interest in a joint venture. The draft documentation originally . .
CitedAshborder Bv and others v Green Gas Power Ltd and others ChD 29-Jun-2004
. .
CitedSandhu (T/A Isher Fashions UK) v Jet Star Retail Ltd and Others CA 19-Apr-2011
The claimant had supplied clothing to the defendant under a contract containing a retention of title clause. The defendant fell into financial difficulties and administration. The claimant now sought damages for conversion of its goods by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219434