Hall & Anor v Elia & Anor [2016] EWHC 1697 (Ch) (12 July 2016)

Hall & Anor v Elia & Anor [2016] EWHC 1697 (Ch) (12 July 2016)

The applications for permission to appeal were refused because Mrs Elia was properly debarred from defending, the Registrar's findings on sham, undervalue, preference, and the quantum secured by the Charge were correct, and Mr Elia had no standing to contest issues beyond possession and sale. There was no real prospect of success on appeal, and no compelling reason to grant permission.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 1697 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant in the Proceedings / Respondent to the Application: Michaela Hall; Applicant in the Proceedings / Respondent to the Application: E-Clear (UK) Plc (in liquidation); Respondent in the Proceedings / Applicant in the Application: Mili Petrou Elia; Respondent in the Proceedings / Applicant in the Application: Elias Elia
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Bankruptcy/property / Application for Permission to Appeal Registrar's Orders
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused to both Mrs Elia and Mr Elia.
Legal Topics
Sham Transactions, Transaction at Undervalue, Preference, Debarring Orders, Relief From Sanctions, Possession and Sale of Property, Costs Orders
Insolvency Property Law Civil Procedure Sham Transactions Transaction at Undervalue Preference Debarring Orders Relief From Sanctions +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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michaela Hall

Applicant in the Proceedings / Respondent to the Application

E-Clear (UK) Plc (in liquidation)

Applicant in the Proceedings / Respondent to the Application

Mili Petrou Elia

Respondent in the Proceedings / Applicant in the Application

Elias Elia

Respondent in the Proceedings / Applicant in the Application

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Bankruptcy/property / Application for Permission to Appeal Registrar's Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deed of Assignment was a sham
  2. 2 Whether the Deed of Assignment should be set aside as a transaction under s.339, s.340, or s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986
  3. 3 Whether Mrs Elia paid the £25,000 consideration

Ratio Decidendi

The applications for permission to appeal were refused because Mrs Elia was properly debarred from defending, the Registrar's findings on sham, undervalue, preference, and the quantum secured by the Charge were correct, and Mr Elia had no standing to contest issues beyond possession and sale. There was no real prospect of success on appeal, and no compelling reason to grant permission.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused to both Mrs Elia and Mr Elia.

Orders

  • Mrs Elia and Mr Elia remain debarred from defending the claim.
  • Registrar's orders on sham, undervalue, preference, and quantum of the Charge stand.