The court examined the extent of the Judge’s discretion on hearing an application to set aside a statutory demand. When property was valued for the purposes of a statutory demand, it should be as on a forced sale. A ‘forced sale’ was taken as one requiring completion within four months. The judge, in dealing with the application to set aside the statutory demand, had refused to allow cross-examination of conflicting valuation evidence in order to establish the value of the security. The Appeal Court was asked if that had been his last opportunity to chalenge the valuation.
Held: rr 7.51 and 7.57 of the 1986 Rules would give the court which heard the petition power to determine the value of the security on proper evidence from both sides, in a case where the debtor satisfied it that there were substantial grounds for thinking that the petitioning creditor might be fully secured.
Judges:
Sir Christopher Slade
Citations:
Gazette 09-Jun-1993, [1996] BPIR 339
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Applied – Owo-Samson v Barclays Bank Plc, Boyden CA 21-May-2003
The appellant challenged a formal statutory demand which had led to his bankruptcy. The demand had included the anticipated cost of realising the charged property, and also had been inflated to allow for extra costs of dealing the appellant who was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Insolvency
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.84768
