Barclays Bank Plc v Guy

Barclays Bank Plc v Guy

The transfer to Ten Acre was voidable, not void, and had not been avoided at the time the charge was granted and registered. Ten Acre was the registered proprietor and entitled to grant the charge. No mistake in registration was shown, and rectification cannot affect the claimant's charge. The doctrine of notice is irrelevant in this context.

Parties
Claimant: Barclays Bank Plc; Defendant: Mr Trevor Guy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 January 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
summary judgment granted for claimant
Legal Topics
Rectification of Land Register, Validity of Legal Charge, Voidable Vs Void Transfer, Priority of Interests, Doctrine of Notice

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barclays Bank Plc

Claimant

Mr Trevor Guy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment Application

  1. 1 Whether Barclays Bank Plc is entitled to sell the property free of any interest of Mr Trevor Guy
  2. 2 Whether the charge is a genuine legal document
  3. 3 Whether the transfer to Ten Acre was fraudulently procured and void or voidable

Ratio Decidendi

The transfer to Ten Acre was voidable, not void, and had not been avoided at the time the charge was granted and registered. Ten Acre was the registered proprietor and entitled to grant the charge. No mistake in registration was shown, and rectification cannot affect the claimant's charge. The doctrine of notice is irrelevant in this context.

Court Disposition

summary judgment granted for claimant

Orders

  • Barclays Bank Plc is entitled to sell the property free of any interest, right or claim of Mr Trevor Guy