Truex v Toll [2009] EWHC 396 (Ch) (06 March 2009)

Truex v Toll [2009] EWHC 396 (Ch) (06 March 2009)

A solicitor's unassessed bill is not a liquidated sum for the purposes of a bankruptcy petition under s. 267 of the Insolvency Act 1986 unless there is a binding agreement supported by consideration or estoppel; a mere admission or acknowledgment by the client is insufficient. There was no clear and unequivocal admission by Mrs Toll of the sums claimed, and thus the bankruptcy order could not stand.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 396 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: David Truex; Defendant/appellant: Eugenie Romanovna Toll
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal Against Bankruptcy Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Liquidated Vs Unliquidated Debt, Solicitors' Bills, Statutory Demand, Assessment of Costs, Bankruptcy Petition Requirements
Insolvency Law Bankruptcy Law Solicitors' Costs Liquidated Vs Unliquidated Debt Solicitors' Bills Statutory Demand Assessment of Costs Bankruptcy Petition Requirements

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Truex

Claimant/respondent

Eugenie Romanovna Toll

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal Against Bankruptcy Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an unassessed solicitor's bill constitutes a liquidated sum for the purposes of a bankruptcy petition under s. 267 Insolvency Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether a mere admission or acknowledgment by the client is sufficient to convert an unliquidated sum into a liquidated sum
  3. 3 Whether there was a clear and unequivocal admission by Mrs Toll of the sums claimed in the invoices

Ratio Decidendi

A solicitor's unassessed bill is not a liquidated sum for the purposes of a bankruptcy petition under s. 267 of the Insolvency Act 1986 unless there is a binding agreement supported by consideration or estoppel; a mere admission or acknowledgment by the client is insufficient. There was no clear and unequivocal admission by Mrs Toll of the sums claimed, and thus the bankruptcy order could not stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Bankruptcy Order set aside