Rehman v Chamberlain & Anor

Rehman v Chamberlain & Anor

The agreement between the claimant and the Company was not so expressed as to create a present equitable right to security at the time of loan advance; it was an agreement to create security in future. Therefore, no immediate security interest existed, and the floating charge is invalid in liquidation. The court will not exercise discretion to rectify the register or extend time for registration post-liquidation absent exceptional circumstances.

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 / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Registration of Charges, Floating Charges, Rectification of Register, Extension of Time for Registration, Liquidation, Equitable Security
Company Law Insolvency Law Registration of Charges Floating Charges Rectification of Register Extension of Time for Registration Liquidation Equitable Security

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 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 / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an agreement for immediate security existed at the time of loan advance
  2. 2 Whether the register of charges should be rectified to record an earlier date
  3. 3 Whether extension of time for registration of a charge is permissible post-liquidation

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement between the claimant and the Company was not so expressed as to create a present equitable right to security at the time of loan advance; it was an agreement to create security in future. Therefore, no immediate security interest existed, and the floating charge is invalid in liquidation. The court will not exercise discretion to rectify the register or extend time for registration post-liquidation absent exceptional circumstances.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed