Vickers v Jackson [2010] EWHC 2213 (Ch) (06 August 2010)

Vickers v Jackson [2010] EWHC 2213 (Ch) (06 August 2010)

The charge and underlying invoices were shams, never intended by either party to have legal effect or to secure any genuine indebtedness. The claimant is entitled to relief as owner, the charge is void and of no effect, and the counterclaim is dismissed.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2213 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Martin Vickers; Defendant: Michael Lawrence Jackson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / High Court Trial With Counterclaim
Outcome
Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Sham Transactions, Void Charges, Illegality, Land Charges, Enforcement of Security, Counterclaim Dismissal
Property Law Contract Law Equity Sham Transactions Void Charges Illegality Land Charges Enforcement of Security +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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Vickers

Claimant

Michael Lawrence Jackson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / High Court Trial With Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charge entered into between the parties was a sham and void
  2. 2 Whether any genuine indebtedness existed to support the charge
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is barred by illegality from seeking relief

Ratio Decidendi

The charge and underlying invoices were shams, never intended by either party to have legal effect or to secure any genuine indebtedness. The claimant is entitled to relief as owner, the charge is void and of no effect, and the counterclaim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration that the charge is void and of no effect
  • Order for removal of the charge and related entries from the Land Charges Registry