Carty & Ors v Carroll

Carty & Ors v Carroll

The trustees' refusal of consent was unreasonable because the factual findings did not support the allegations of deliberate or malicious conduct by Miss White, and the insurance argument was based on an unreasonable belief not supported by evidence.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Anthony Valentine Carty; Claimant/respondent: Raquel Mercedes White; Claimant/respondent: Graeme Johnson; Defendant/appellant: Peter Dan Carroll; Defendant/appellant: Paul Hawkins
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Assignment of Licence, Reasonableness of Withholding Consent, Trustees' Duties, Insurance Disclosure
Property Law Contract Law Assignment of Licence Reasonableness of Withholding Consent Trustees' Duties Insurance Disclosure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Valentine Carty

Claimant/respondent

Raquel Mercedes White

Claimant/respondent

Graeme Johnson

Claimant/respondent

Peter Dan Carroll

Defendant/appellant

Paul Hawkins

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trustees unreasonably withheld consent to the assignment of a licence to use a swimming pool
  2. 2 Whether the alleged incidents involving Miss White justified refusal of consent
  3. 3 Whether insurance considerations justified refusal of consent

Ratio Decidendi

The trustees' refusal of consent was unreasonable because the factual findings did not support the allegations of deliberate or malicious conduct by Miss White, and the insurance argument was based on an unreasonable belief not supported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • No order for costs