Maud v Aabar Block S.A.R.L. & Anor [2015] EWHC 1626 (Ch) (08 June 2015)

Maud v Aabar Block S.A.R.L. & Anor [2015] EWHC 1626 (Ch) (08 June 2015)

There is no substantial dispute that the judgment debt is due, as the documentation does not support that the debt was extinguished by Mr Quinlan's arrangements. The statutory demand is not an abuse of process, as the Respondents' pursuit of bankruptcy is not contrary to the interests of the general body of creditors and is not for an improper collateral purpose.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1626 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant: Glenn Maud; First Respondent: Aabar Block S. A. R. L.; Second Respondent: Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S. A. R. L.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Joint and Several Liability, Abuse of Process, Collateral Purpose, Debt Satisfaction, Security Interests
Insolvency Bankruptcy Commercial Law Statutory Demand Joint and Several Liability Abuse of Process Collateral Purpose Debt Satisfaction +1 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glenn Maud

Applicant

Aabar Block S. A. R. L.

First Respondent

Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) S. A. R. L.

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judgment debt has been extinguished by satisfaction from a co-debtor
  2. 2 Whether the statutory demand is an abuse of process due to collateral purpose

Ratio Decidendi

There is no substantial dispute that the judgment debt is due, as the documentation does not support that the debt was extinguished by Mr Quinlan's arrangements. The statutory demand is not an abuse of process, as the Respondents' pursuit of bankruptcy is not contrary to the interests of the general body of creditors and is not for an improper collateral purpose.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to set aside the statutory demand is refused.