Wave Lending Ltd v Parmar & Anor [2017] EWHC 681 (Ch) (31 March 2017)

Wave Lending Ltd v Parmar & Anor [2017] EWHC 681 (Ch) (31 March 2017)

The bankruptcy petitions did not comply with either section 267 or section 269 of the Insolvency Act 1986 because the debt claimed was not a liquidated sum and the petitions did not contain the required statement of the estimated value of the security. Therefore, the bankruptcy orders must be set aside and the petitions remitted for further consideration.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 681 (Ch)
Parties
Petitioner/respondent: Wave Lending Limited; Debtor/appellant: Thakorbhai Ranchhodji Parmar; Debtor/appellant: Rama Parmar
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal From Bankruptcy Orders
Outcome
Appeals allowed; bankruptcy orders discharged; petitions remitted to County Court.
Legal Topics
Statutory Demands, Secured and Unsecured Debts, Liquidated Sum, Bankruptcy Petitions, Insolvency Act 1986
Insolvency Bankruptcy Statutory Demands Secured and Unsecured Debts Liquidated Sum Bankruptcy Petitions Insolvency Act 1986

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wave Lending Limited

Petitioner/respondent

Thakorbhai Ranchhodji Parmar

Debtor/appellant

Rama Parmar

Debtor/appellant

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Appeal / Appeal From Bankruptcy Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether bankruptcy petitions based on estimated unsecured shortfall of a secured debt comply with Insolvency Act 1986 sections 267 and 269
  2. 2 Whether the petition debt constitutes a 'liquidated sum' under section 267(2)

Ratio Decidendi

The bankruptcy petitions did not comply with either section 267 or section 269 of the Insolvency Act 1986 because the debt claimed was not a liquidated sum and the petitions did not contain the required statement of the estimated value of the security. Therefore, the bankruptcy orders must be set aside and the petitions remitted for further consideration.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; bankruptcy orders discharged; petitions remitted to County Court.

Orders

  • Existing bankruptcy orders discharged
  • Petitions remitted to County Court for determination of any applications to amend and further directions