Kaye v Lees [2022] EWHC 3326 (KB) (21 December 2022)

Kaye v Lees [2022] EWHC 3326 (KB) (21 December 2022)

Mr Kaye is subrogated to Santander's rights as creditor, but this does not create an additional debt under the 2020 Regulations due to Regulation 13. The application for review or cancellation of the moratorium was made out of time, and the court has no power to extend the time limits set by the Regulations. Enforcement action (eviction and sale) would be detrimental to Ms Lees and is not permitted under Regulation 7(2)(b).

Citation
[2022] EWHC 3326 (KB)
Parties
Applicant: Ivan Kaye; Respondent: Amanda Lees; Interested Party: Chelsea Dixon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2022
Procedural Posture
High Court Application Under Debt Respite Scheme Regulations / Judgment on Application for Declarations and Orders Under the Debt Respite Scheme (breathing Space Moratorium and Mental Health Crisis Moratorium) Regulations 2020
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Debt Respite Scheme, Breathing Space Moratorium, Mental Health Crisis Moratorium, Subrogation, Unjust Enrichment, Enforcement of Judgments
Civil Procedure Insolvency Law Mental Health Law Debt Respite Scheme Breathing Space Moratorium Mental Health Crisis Moratorium Subrogation Unjust Enrichment +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ivan Kaye

Applicant

Amanda Lees

Respondent

Chelsea Dixon

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

High Court Application Under Debt Respite Scheme Regulations / Judgment on Application for Declarations and Orders Under the Debt Respite Scheme (breathing Space Moratorium and Mental Health Crisis Moratorium) Regulations 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Kaye is subrogated to Santander's rights as creditor after paying off Ms Lees' mortgage debt
  2. 2 Whether the subrogated debt constitutes an additional debt under Regulation 15 of the 2020 Regulations
  3. 3 Whether Mr Kaye can apply for review or cancellation of the moratorium under Regulations 17, 18, or 19

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Kaye is subrogated to Santander's rights as creditor, but this does not create an additional debt under the 2020 Regulations due to Regulation 13. The application for review or cancellation of the moratorium was made out of time, and the court has no power to extend the time limits set by the Regulations. Enforcement action (eviction and sale) would be detrimental to Ms Lees and is not permitted under Regulation 7(2)(b).

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration that Mr Kaye is subrogated to Santander's rights as creditor
  • Refusal of all applications under the 2020 Regulations: (a) subrogated debt is not an additional debt for Regulation 15; (b) application under Regulation 19 fails as out of time and no review was conducted; (c) application under Regulation 7(2) fails as eviction would be detrimental to Ms Lees