The respondent farmers charged the farm by way of an agricultural floating charge to the claimants. On coming into difficulties, they set up a limited company and granted a tenancy in its favour and transferred assets to it. The bank obtained declarations that the charges remained valid and that the new tenancies and assignments should be set aside. The tenants appealed, but failed. The admitted purpose of the transactions was to put the assets beyond the reach of the bank, and that they were at an undervalue. The Agricultural Credits Act operated therefore to crystallise the charge. As to s423, it: ‘requires a comparison to be made between two figures. For that purpose the court must arrive at a conclusion based on actual values. The evidence may, of course, disclose a range of suggested figures. But the court must ascertain from the evidence the actual value against which the consideration for the transaction must be measured. That was the approach adopted by the judge. It is correct.’
Judges:
Judge LJ, Mummery LJ, Sir Martin Nourse
Citations:
Gazette 15-Nov-2001, Times 19-Nov-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1541, [2002] 1 BCLC 55
Links:
Statutes:
Insolvency Act 1986 423, Agricultural Credits Act 1928 7
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – National Westminster Bank Plc v Jones and Others ChD 7-Jul-2000
A transaction could be deemed to be at an undervalue and caught by the section even though it made no difference to the overall assets and even though only one rather than the generality of creditors was prejudiced by the transaction. Here, by . .
Cited by:
Cited – Re Thoars (Dec’d); Reid v Ramlort Ltd ChD 2003
The company claimed the benefit of an insurance policy. They had paid certain premiums and the trustee had made a declaration that it was held on trust for the company. The insured died in Scotland, intestate and insolvent.
Held: The . .
Cited – Ramlort Ltd v Michael James Meston Reid CA 8-Jul-2004
The company sought to claim under a life policy. The deceased had died in Scotland insolvent. The trustee of the policy had declared that he held it on trust for the claimant, but the defendant, the judicial factor of the estate, said the . .
Cited – Feakins and Another v Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Civ 1513) CA 9-Dec-2005
The department complained that the defendants had entered into a transaction with their farm at an undervalue so as to defeat its claim for recovery of sums due. The transaction used the grant of a tenancy by the first chargee.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Banking, Agriculture, Insolvency
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166777