(Note) The court considered when to grant relief to the Sherriff against an interpleader on a compliant by a debtor.
Held: The appropriate test to apply was whether the claimant had suffered a ‘real and substantial grievance’. The court acknowledged that a sale of the claimant’s goods at a significant undervalue could give rise to a substantial grievance
Sir John Pennycuick observed: ‘I abstain from expressing a concluded view as to the meaning and scope of the expression ‘substantial grievance’. The authorities cited to us on this question do not seem to me wholly easy to reconcile.’
Lane LJ said: ‘It is the quality of the sheriff’s admitted wrong which is relevant.’
Megaw LJ said: ‘I am prepared to assume for the purposes of this appeal that it would constitute ‘a substantial grievance,’ within those words as they have been used in the number of cases which have been cited to us, if there were material on which it could be said to be fairly arguable that the sheriff, having, without any misconduct or negligence on his part, seized and sold goods which did not in fact belong to the judgment debtor, has sold them at a price which was substantially less than their true value at the date when they were thus sold.’
Judges:
Lane LJ, Megaw LJ, Sir John Pennycuick
Citations:
[1983] 1 WLR 1016
Cited by:
Cited – Huntress Search Ltd v Canapeum Ltd and Another QBD 28-May-2010
The court was asked whether it had been correct to refuse relief to the High Court Enforcement Officer in the form of a restraint on an interpleader when this was sought by the applicant.
Held: The test was whether there was evidence entitling . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.416221
