Rehman v Chamberlain & Anor [2011] EWHC 2318 (Ch) (06 September 2011)

Rehman v Chamberlain & Anor [2011] EWHC 2318 (Ch) (06 September 2011)

The evidence did not establish that an agreement for immediate security was reached on 12 February 2009; rather, the advance was made in anticipation of the formal Debenture. Even if an informal security had existed, the court would not exercise its discretion to rectify the register or extend time for registration after liquidation, as this would prejudice unsecured creditors and is contrary to established practice.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 2318 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Atique Rehman; First Defendant: Michael Chamberlain (as liquidator of Meritmill (UK) Limited); Second Defendant: The Registrar of Companies
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim and Application for Directions / Judgment After Trial of Part 8 Claim
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Rectification of Register of Charges, Floating Charges, Registration of Charges, Extension of Time for Registration, Invalidity of Security in Insolvency
Insolvency Company Law Rectification of Register of Charges Floating Charges Registration of Charges Extension of Time for Registration Invalidity of Security in Insolvency

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Atique Rehman

Claimant

Michael Chamberlain (as liquidator of Meritmill (UK) Limited)

First Defendant

The Registrar of Companies

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim and Application for Directions / Judgment After Trial of Part 8 Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an informal agreement created an equitable floating charge prior to execution of the Debenture
  2. 2 Whether the register of charges should be rectified to reflect an earlier date for the charge
  3. 3 Whether time for registration of an alleged earlier charge should be extended after liquidation

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish that an agreement for immediate security was reached on 12 February 2009; rather, the advance was made in anticipation of the formal Debenture. Even if an informal security had existed, the court would not exercise its discretion to rectify the register or extend time for registration after liquidation, as this would prejudice unsecured creditors and is contrary to established practice.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed