Amari Lifestyle Ltd (t/a Amari Super Cars) v Warnes & Ors [2017] EWHC 1891 (Ch) (21 July 2017)

Amari Lifestyle Ltd (t/a Amari Super Cars) v Warnes & Ors [2017] EWHC 1891 (Ch) (21 July 2017)

The CH1 and the 2014 legal mortgage created valid equitable security interests in favour of the trustees, which take priority over the claimant's charging order. The trustees are unlikely to waive their security, so an order for sale would not benefit the claimant. Therefore, it would be futile to order sale and the claim is dismissed.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1891 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Amari Lifestyle Limited t/a Amari Super Cars; First Defendant: Matthew Giles Warnes; Second Defendant: Charles William Anthony Warnes; Third Defendant: Michael John Bulcok
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Claim Under Part 8 for Order for Sale of Property Under S.15 Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1994 / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Judgments, Charging Orders, Trusts of Land, Equitable Mortgages, Order for Sale, Discretionary Trusts, Priority of Charges
Property Law Trusts and Equity Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Charging Orders Trusts of Land Equitable Mortgages Order for Sale +2 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 18
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amari Lifestyle Limited t/a Amari Super Cars

Claimant

Matthew Giles Warnes

First Defendant

Charles William Anthony Warnes

Second Defendant

Michael John Bulcok

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Claim Under Part 8 for Order for Sale of Property Under S.15 Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1994 / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CH1 form created a valid equitable charge over Matthew Warnes' interest in the property
  2. 2 Whether the 2014 legal mortgage created a valid equitable mortgage over the property
  3. 3 Whether the trustees would enforce their security interests if an order for sale was made

Ratio Decidendi

The CH1 and the 2014 legal mortgage created valid equitable security interests in favour of the trustees, which take priority over the claimant's charging order. The trustees are unlikely to waive their security, so an order for sale would not benefit the claimant. Therefore, it would be futile to order sale and the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed