Wallace & Anor v Crossley & Anor [2009] EWCA Civ 896 (10 July 2009)

Wallace & Anor v Crossley & Anor [2009] EWCA Civ 896 (10 July 2009)

The County Court had jurisdiction to order the sale of the property following transfer from the High Court, regardless of the debt exceeding £30,000, as established in National Westminster Bank v King. There was no error of law or principle in refusing a stay, and no breach of Convention rights was established.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 896
Parties
Appellants: Wallace & Anr; Respondents: Crossley & Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Jurisdiction of County Court, Charging Orders, Human Rights (articles 6 and 8 Echr)
Civil Procedure Property Law Enforcement of Judgments Stay of Execution Jurisdiction of County Court Charging Orders Human Rights (articles 6 and 8 Echr)

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

Parties

Wallace & Anr

Appellants

Crossley & Anr

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in refusing a stay of an order for sale of property to enforce a charging order
  2. 2 Whether the County Court had jurisdiction to order sale where the debt exceeded £30,000
  3. 3 Whether the appellants' Convention rights (Articles 6 and 8 ECHR) were breached

Ratio Decidendi

The County Court had jurisdiction to order the sale of the property following transfer from the High Court, regardless of the debt exceeding £30,000, as established in National Westminster Bank v King. There was no error of law or principle in refusing a stay, and no breach of Convention rights was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellants to pay respondents' costs summarily assessed at £2,200