Scottish & Newcastle Plc v Raguz

Scottish & Newcastle Plc v Raguz

The claimant is entitled to indemnity from the defendant for the sums claimed, subject to credit for £10,072.21, because the payments made by the claimant were expenses or claims on account of the non-payment of rent by the assignee, falling within the scope of the s.24 indemnity. The claimant's actions in supporting the administrative receivers and facilitating the sale were commercially reasonable and did not deprive it of the right to indemnity. The validity of s.17 notices affected liability for certain sums, but the claimant's conduct in prompting notices or paying sums not strictly due did not preclude recovery, as these were foreseeable expenses necessary to resolve the liability...

Parties
Claimant: Scottish & Newcastle PLC; Defendant: Zeljko Stephen Raguz
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant, subject to credit for £10,072.21.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Under Lease Assignment, Section 17 Landlord and Tenant (covenants) Act 1995, Liability for Rent Arrears, Mitigation of Loss, Effect of S.24 Land Registration Act 1925
Landlord and Tenant Law Contract Law Indemnity Under Lease Assignment Section 17 Landlord and Tenant (covenants) Act 1995 Liability for Rent Arrears Mitigation of Loss Effect of S.24 Land Registration Act 1925

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scottish & Newcastle PLC

Claimant

Zeljko Stephen Raguz

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to indemnity from the defendant for rent arrears under two underleases assigned to the defendant
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's actions in supporting the administrative receivers and entering into the Maintenance Agreement affected its right to indemnity
  3. 3 Whether the service and validity of s.17 notices under the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 affected the claimant's liability and right to recover from the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is entitled to indemnity from the defendant for the sums claimed, subject to credit for £10,072.21, because the payments made by the claimant were expenses or claims on account of the non-payment of rent by the assignee, falling within the scope of the s.24 indemnity. The claimant's actions in supporting the administrative receivers and facilitating the sale were commercially reasonable and did not deprive it of the right to indemnity. The validity of s.17 notices affected liability for certain sums, but the claimant's conduct in prompting notices or paying sums not strictly due did not preclude recovery, as these were foreseeable expenses necessary to resolve the liability...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant, subject to credit for £10,072.21.

Orders

  • The defendant shall pay the claimant the sums claimed, less £10,072.21.