Lees v Kaye [2022] EWHC 1151 (QB) (13 May 2022)

Lees v Kaye [2022] EWHC 1151 (QB) (13 May 2022)

The eviction and sale of the lease were enforcement actions taken in breach of an effective mental health crisis moratorium under the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020; the judgment debt was not a non-eligible debt as it did not consist of damages for personal injury; regulation 7(13) preserves the charging order...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1151 (QB)
Parties
Applicant: Amanda Lees; First Respondent: Ivan Kaye; Second Respondent: Chelsea Dixon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 May 2022
Procedural Posture
High Court Application (queen's Bench Division) / Judgment on Application to Declare Eviction and Sale Null and Void Under Debt Respite Scheme Regulations
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Debt Respite Scheme, Breathing Space Moratorium, Mental Health Crisis Moratorium, Enforcement of Judgments, Charging Orders, Possession and Sale of Leasehold Property, Personal Injury Definition, Restitution
Civil Procedure Property Law Mental Health Law Debt Respite Scheme Breathing Space Moratorium Mental Health Crisis Moratorium Enforcement of Judgments Charging Orders +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amanda Lees

Applicant

Ivan Kaye

First Respondent

Chelsea Dixon

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

High Court Application (queen's Bench Division) / Judgment on Application to Declare Eviction and Sale Null and Void Under Debt Respite Scheme Regulations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a mental health crisis moratorium was effective at the date of eviction and sale
  2. 2 Whether the judgment debt was a non-eligible debt as damages for personal injury
  3. 3 Whether enforcement of charging orders is excluded from the moratorium

Ratio Decidendi

The eviction and sale of the lease were enforcement actions taken in breach of an effective mental health crisis moratorium under the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020; the judgment debt was not a non-eligible debt as it did not consist of damages for personal injury; regulation 7(13) preserves the charging order but does not permit enforcement during the moratorium; actions taken in breach of regulation 7 are null and void; the applicant is entitled to restoration of her position prior to eviction and sale.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Declaration that the eviction and sale were null and void under regulation 7(12) of the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020
  • Order restoring the applicant to her position prior to eviction and sale