Anfield (UK) Ltd v Bank of Scotland Plc & Ors [2010] EWHC 2374 (Ch) (24 September 2010)

Anfield (UK) Ltd v Bank of Scotland Plc & Ors [2010] EWHC 2374 (Ch) (24 September 2010)

A lender who advances funds to discharge a prior legal charge but fails to register its own legal charge is entitled to be subrogated to the prior charge, as the lender did not obtain all it bargained for (a legal charge), and the enrichment of intermediate lenders is unjust. Negligence in failing to register does not bar subrogation. The policy of the Land Registration Act 2002 does not preclude subrogation, subject to possible defences by third parties who have changed position.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2374 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant Appellant: Anfield (UK) Limited; First Defendant/respondent: Bank of Scotland PLC; Second Defendant: Shafqat Ahmed Siddiqui; Third Defendant: London Scottish Finance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court (chancery Division) Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Subrogation, Priority of Charges, Land Registration, Unjust Enrichment
Property Law Equity Restitution Subrogation Priority of Charges Land Registration Unjust Enrichment

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anfield (UK) Limited

Claimant Appellant

Bank of Scotland PLC

First Defendant/respondent

Shafqat Ahmed Siddiqui

Second Defendant

London Scottish Finance Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court (chancery Division) Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a lender who fails to register a legal charge is entitled to be subrogated to a prior charge discharged with its advance, thereby gaining priority over intermediate lenders.
  2. 2 Whether the enrichment of intermediate secured lenders is unjust where the lender claiming subrogation failed to register its charge.

Ratio Decidendi

A lender who advances funds to discharge a prior legal charge but fails to register its own legal charge is entitled to be subrogated to the prior charge, as the lender did not obtain all it bargained for (a legal charge), and the enrichment of intermediate lenders is unjust. Negligence in failing to register does not bar subrogation. The policy of the Land Registration Act 2002 does not preclude subrogation, subject to possible defences by third parties who have changed position.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The Bank of Scotland PLC is entitled to be subrogated to the Halifax Charge to the extent of the moneys advanced to discharge it.