Haydock Finance Ltd v Starcruiser Bussing Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 622 (Comm) (17 March 2021)

Haydock Finance Ltd v Starcruiser Bussing Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 622 (Comm) (17 March 2021)

The Defendants failed to show any arguable defence to the Claimant's right to delivery up of the vehicle under the lease agreement, nor any basis that securitisation or assignment deprived the Claimant of standing. The procedural and jurisdictional objections were unfounded. Accordingly, an order for delivery up is appropriate.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 622 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Haydock Finance Limited; First Defendant: Starcruiser Bussing Limited; Second Defendant: Mr Paul Coleman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Claim for Delivery Up of Goods and Money Due Under Lease and Guarantee / Fixed Date Hearing; Application for Delivery Up; Application for Transfer to Chancery Division
Outcome
Order for delivery up of the vehicle granted; no judgment on money claim at this stage.
Legal Topics
Lease Agreements, Guarantees, Securitisation, Jurisdiction, Summary Judgment, Recovery of Goods
Commercial Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Lease Agreements Guarantees Securitisation Jurisdiction Summary Judgment +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Haydock Finance Limited

Claimant

Starcruiser Bussing Limited

First Defendant

Mr Paul Coleman

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Claim for Delivery Up of Goods and Money Due Under Lease and Guarantee / Fixed Date Hearing; Application for Delivery Up; Application for Transfer to Chancery Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to an order for delivery up of the vehicle under the lease agreement
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants have any defence to the claim for delivery up or money due
  3. 3 Whether the claim should be transferred to the Chancery Division

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants failed to show any arguable defence to the Claimant's right to delivery up of the vehicle under the lease agreement, nor any basis that securitisation or assignment deprived the Claimant of standing. The procedural and jurisdictional objections were unfounded. Accordingly, an order for delivery up is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Order for delivery up of the vehicle granted; no judgment on money claim at this stage.

Orders

  • Defendants to deliver up the vehicle to the Claimant.
  • No order on the money claim unless Defendants consent or further application is made.