Kaye v Lees [2023] EWHC 758 (KB) (31 March 2023)

Kaye v Lees [2023] EWHC 758 (KB) (31 March 2023)

The High Court refused to extend the injunction because Parliament has conferred an unfettered statutory right on debtors to apply for a moratorium under the Regulations, and the court has no jurisdiction to restrict that right absent express statutory provision. The proper remedy for any abuse or improper grant of a moratorium lies in challenging the debt advisor's decision, not in restraining the debtor from applying.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 758 (KB)
Parties
Applicant: Ivan Kaye; Respondent: Amanda Lees
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Application to Extend Injunction / High Court, Post Judgment, Application to Extend Injunction
Outcome
Application to extend injunction refused
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Debt Respite Scheme, Breathing Space Moratorium, Mental Health Crisis Moratorium, Enforcement of Judgments, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Insolvency Law Mental Health Law Injunctions Debt Respite Scheme Breathing Space Moratorium Mental Health Crisis Moratorium Enforcement of Judgments +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ivan Kaye

Applicant

Amanda Lees

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Extend Injunction / High Court, Post Judgment, Application to Extend Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court should extend an injunction restraining the respondent from applying for a Breathing Space or Mental Health Crisis Moratorium under the Debt Respite Scheme Regulations 2020.
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to limit a debtor's statutory right to apply for a moratorium under the Regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court refused to extend the injunction because Parliament has conferred an unfettered statutory right on debtors to apply for a moratorium under the Regulations, and the court has no jurisdiction to restrict that right absent express statutory provision. The proper remedy for any abuse or improper grant of a moratorium lies in challenging the debt advisor's decision, not in restraining the debtor from applying.

Court Disposition

Application to extend injunction refused

Orders

  • Refusal to extend the injunction restraining the respondent from applying for a Breathing Space or Mental Health Crisis Moratorium.