Crumpler & Anor v Candey Ltd [2017] EWHC 1511 (Ch) (23 June 2017)

Crumpler & Anor v Candey Ltd [2017] EWHC 1511 (Ch) (23 June 2017)

The SCB Monies are subject to a charge in favour of Candey Limited, but the charge is floating, not fixed, and is subject to the operation of section 245 Insolvency Act 1986. The Court Monies, once paid out to Peak, became an asset of the company and are also subject to the floating charge, not a fixed charge. Section 245 applies to limit the sums secured by the floating charge to the extent of new value provided. The charge does not operate as a fixed charge over the relevant monies.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1511 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant (joint Liquidator): Russell Crumpler; Applicant (joint Liquidator): Sarah Bower; Respondent: Candey Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Application Under Cross Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 / Judgment on Application to Determine Efficacy and Nature of Security Charge
Outcome
Application granted in part; declaration as to nature of charge and application of s245 Insolvency Act 1986.
Legal Topics
Fixed and Floating Charges, Security Interests, Monies in Court, Priority of Creditors, Recognition of Foreign Insolvency Proceedings
Insolvency Company Law Cross Border Insolvency Fixed and Floating Charges Security Interests Monies in Court Priority of Creditors Recognition of Foreign Insolvency Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Russell Crumpler

Applicant (joint Liquidator)

Sarah Bower

Applicant (joint Liquidator)

Candey Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Cross Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 / Judgment on Application to Determine Efficacy and Nature of Security Charge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sums (SCB Monies and Court Monies) are subject to a valid charge in favour of Candey Limited
  2. 2 Whether the charge is fixed or floating
  3. 3 Whether section 245 Insolvency Act 1986 applies to limit the sums secured

Ratio Decidendi

The SCB Monies are subject to a charge in favour of Candey Limited, but the charge is floating, not fixed, and is subject to the operation of section 245 Insolvency Act 1986. The Court Monies, once paid out to Peak, became an asset of the company and are also subject to the floating charge, not a fixed charge. Section 245 applies to limit the sums secured by the floating charge to the extent of new value provided. The charge does not operate as a fixed charge over the relevant monies.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; declaration as to nature of charge and application of s245 Insolvency Act 1986.

Orders

  • Declaration that the SCB Monies and Court Monies are subject to a floating charge in favour of Candey Limited, not a fixed charge.
  • Declaration that section 245 Insolvency Act 1986 applies to limit the sums secured by the floating charge.