C Putnam & Sons v Taylor & Anor [2009] EWHC 317 (Ch) (29 January 2009)

C Putnam & Sons v Taylor & Anor [2009] EWHC 317 (Ch) (29 January 2009)

At the time of the charging order, Mr and Mrs Taylor were beneficial joint tenants; the charging order severed the joint tenancy, making them tenants in common in equal shares. Mrs Taylor's subsequent claim to sole ownership, even if valid, cannot defeat the claimant's prior registered charging order. The court's discretion under TLATA, considering all relevant factors and human rights, requires a sale to satisfy the claimant's debt, as there is no other prospect of recovery and indefinite delay would be unfair to the creditor.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 317 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: C Putnam & Sons; First Defendant: Archibald Taylor; Second Defendant: Agneta Taylor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Application to Enforce Charging Order and for Order for Sale / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Order for sale granted, with deferred possession to allow private sale by defendants until 15 June 2009; if not sold by then, possession to claimant for sale.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Charging Orders, Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (tlata), Beneficial Ownership, Order for Sale of Family Home, Human Rights (article 8 ECHR, Article 1 First Protocol)
Property Law Trusts Law Civil Procedure Enforcement of Charging Orders Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (tlata) Beneficial Ownership Order for Sale of Family Home Human Rights (article 8 Echr, Article 1 First Protocol)

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C Putnam & Sons

Claimant

Archibald Taylor

First Defendant

Agneta Taylor

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Enforce Charging Order and for Order for Sale / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mrs Taylor is solely beneficially entitled to the property
  2. 2 Whether the charging order should be enforced by sale of the property
  3. 3 Balancing interests under TLATA and human rights law

Ratio Decidendi

At the time of the charging order, Mr and Mrs Taylor were beneficial joint tenants; the charging order severed the joint tenancy, making them tenants in common in equal shares. Mrs Taylor's subsequent claim to sole ownership, even if valid, cannot defeat the claimant's prior registered charging order. The court's discretion under TLATA, considering all relevant factors and human rights, requires a sale to satisfy the claimant's debt, as there is no other prospect of recovery and indefinite delay would be unfair to the creditor.

Court Disposition

Order for sale granted, with deferred possession to allow private sale by defendants until 15 June 2009; if not sold by then, possession to claimant for sale.

Orders

  • Defendants to have conduct of sale by private treaty until 15 June 2009.
  • If property not sold by 15 June 2009, possession to be given to claimant, who may then conduct the sale.