Seculink Ltd v Forbes (No. 2) [2025] EWHC 524 (Ch) (11 March 2025)

The principal sum under a secured debt, even if called in and due before the moratorium, is not 'arrears' for the purposes of Regulation 5(4)(a) of the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020 and therefore is not a moratorium debt; only non-principal sums due and unpaid constitute arrears and are subject to the moratorium.

Citation: [2025] EWHC 524 (Ch)
Parties: Appellant/claimant: Seculink Ltd; Respondent/defendant: David James Terence Forbes
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 11 March 2025
Procedural Posture: Appeal From County Court / Judgment on Point of Law
Outcome: Point decided in favour of Appellant; principal sum is not a moratorium debt.
Legal Topics: Debt Respite Scheme, Breathing Space Moratorium, Mental Health Crisis Moratorium, Statutory Interpretation, Secured Debt, Arrears

Insolvency Property Law Debt Recovery Debt Respite Scheme Breathing Space Moratorium Mental Health Crisis Moratorium Statutory Interpretation Secured Debt +1 more

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 1 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Seculink Ltd

Appellant/claimant

David James Terence Forbes

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From County Court / Judgment on Point of Law

Legal Issues

1 Whether principal under a secured debt called in before a moratorium is a 'moratorium debt' under the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020
2 Interpretation of 'arrears' in Regulation 5(4)(a)

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Point decided in favour of Appellant; principal sum is not a moratorium debt.