Bank of Scotland Plc v Peter Lisney Hoskins & Anor

Bank of Scotland Plc v Peter Lisney Hoskins & Anor

The claimant is entitled to possession as mortgagee due to substantial arrears and no valid defence. Relief from sanction for late evidence was refused due to serious delay, lack of explanation, and prejudice to the claimant. Permission to amend the defence and counterclaim was refused as the amendments were very...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Bank of Scotland PLC; Defendant: Peter Lisney Hoskins; Proposed Second Defendant: Jemima Jane Hoskins
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Mortgage Possession and Related Applications / Judgment After Hearing of Possession Claim, Applications for Relief From Sanction, Permission to Amend Defence, and Joinder
Outcome
Possession order granted to claimant; all applications by defendant and Mrs Hoskins dismissed.
Legal Topics
Mortgage Possession, Relief From Sanctions, Amendment of Pleadings, Joinder of Parties, Equitable Interests, Undue Influence, Consumer Credit, Human Rights
Property Law Civil Procedure Equity Mortgage Possession Relief From Sanctions Amendment of Pleadings Joinder of Parties Equitable Interests +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bank of Scotland PLC

Claimant

Peter Lisney Hoskins

Defendant

Jemima Jane Hoskins

Proposed Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Mortgage Possession and Related Applications / Judgment After Hearing of Possession Claim, Applications for Relief From Sanction, Permission to Amend Defence, and Joinder

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to possession of the mortgaged property
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should be granted relief from sanction for late evidence
  3. 3 Whether the defendant should be permitted to amend his defence and counterclaim

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is entitled to possession as mortgagee due to substantial arrears and no valid defence. Relief from sanction for late evidence was refused due to serious delay, lack of explanation, and prejudice to the claimant. Permission to amend the defence and counterclaim was refused as the amendments were very late, lacked merit, and would not provide a defence to possession. Mrs Hoskins' joinder application was dismissed as any equitable interest would be subordinate to the mortgage under the acquisition mortgage principle, and there was no arguable case against the claimant. Section 36 did not apply as there was no likelihood of payment within a reasonable period. Human rights...

Court Disposition

Possession order granted to claimant; all applications by defendant and Mrs Hoskins dismissed.

Orders

  • Defendant to give up possession by noon on Tuesday 11 April 2023.
  • Claimant's money claim adjourned with liberty to restore.