Carman v Yates & Ors

Carman v Yates & Ors

The judge's approach to calculating the beneficial interest, by attributing to Mr Yates a share in the property proportionate to his contributions (reduced for uncertainties), was a proper exercise of discretion under the Insolvency Act and consistent with the statutory purpose of making assets available to creditors. The applicant failed to show a real prospect of success on appeal against this approach.

Parties
Claimant/respondent (trustee of the Estate of Bankrupt): Russell John Carman; First Defendant/applicant: Denis Anthony Yates; Second Defendant: Valerie Ann Yates; Third Defendant: Hannah Dempster
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Bankruptcy, Beneficial Interest, Setting Aside Transactions, Trustee Powers, Calculation of Beneficial Shares
Insolvency Law Property Law Bankruptcy Beneficial Interest Setting Aside Transactions Trustee Powers Calculation of Beneficial Shares

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Russell John Carman

Claimant/respondent (trustee of the Estate of Bankrupt)

Denis Anthony Yates

First Defendant/applicant

Valerie Ann Yates

Second Defendant

Hannah Dempster

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in calculating the beneficial interest of Mr Yates in the property known as The Hewarths
  2. 2 Whether the transactions relating to the property and improvements should be set aside under the Insolvency Act
  3. 3 Whether the judge's exercise of discretion in attributing shares in the property was correct

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's approach to calculating the beneficial interest, by attributing to Mr Yates a share in the property proportionate to his contributions (reduced for uncertainties), was a proper exercise of discretion under the Insolvency Act and consistent with the statutory purpose of making assets available to creditors. The applicant failed to show a real prospect of success on appeal against this approach.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused
  • Application regarding costs refused