Feakins & Anor v Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs

Feakins & Anor v Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs

The arrangement between KF and Miss Hawkins was a 'transaction' for the purposes of s.423 Insolvency Act 1986, entered into for the purpose of putting assets beyond DEFRA's reach as a creditor, and at an undervalue. DEFRA was a victim of the transaction. The court ordered restoration of DEFRA's position by charging Miss Hawkins' interest in Hill Farm with the judgment debt, and reinstated the tenancy. On the counterclaim, DEFRA's statutory authority to interfere with land was limited; certain acts constituted trespass, but only limited damages were appropriate.

Parties
Appellants/defendants: Feakins and Anr; Respondent/claimant: Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed save for variation; counterclaim allowed in part
Legal Topics
Transaction at an Undervalue, Statutory Authority for Trespass, Remedies for Trespass, Interpretation of Insolvency Act 1986 S.423, Foot and Mouth Disease Control, Compensation for Slaughtered Animals, Groundwater Pollution, EU Directives and Decisions
Insolvency Law Property Law Administrative Law Environmental Law European Union Law Transaction at an Undervalue Statutory Authority for Trespass Remedies for Trespass +5 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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Feakins and Anr

Appellants/defendants

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arrangement between KF and Miss Hawkins constituted a transaction at an undervalue under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether DEFRA was a 'victim' of the transaction under section 423
  3. 3 Whether the arrangement was entered into for the purpose of prejudicing DEFRA's interests

Ratio Decidendi

The arrangement between KF and Miss Hawkins was a 'transaction' for the purposes of s.423 Insolvency Act 1986, entered into for the purpose of putting assets beyond DEFRA's reach as a creditor, and at an undervalue. DEFRA was a victim of the transaction. The court ordered restoration of DEFRA's position by charging Miss Hawkins' interest in Hill Farm with the judgment debt, and reinstated the tenancy. On the counterclaim, DEFRA's statutory authority to interfere with land was limited; certain acts constituted trespass, but only limited damages were appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed save for variation; counterclaim allowed in part

Orders

  • Miss Hawkins' beneficial interest in Hill Farm charged with the sums due to DEFRA under the judgment, ranking behind the Robin Feakins charge.
  • Tenancy reinstated.