Henderson v. Foxworth Investments Ltd [2011] ScotCS CSOH_66 (12 April 2011)

Henderson v. Foxworth Investments Ltd [2011] ScotCS CSOH_66 (12 April 2011)

The pursuer failed to establish that Foxworth did not acquire the standard security in good faith and for value. The evidence did not support the pursuer's contention that the transaction was a sham or that Foxworth had knowledge that would vitiate good faith. The disposition to NSL was not proved to be for inadequate consideration. Accordingly, the standard security is not void or unenforceable.

Citation
[2011] CSOH 66
Parties
Pursuer: Matthew Purdon Henderson; First Defender: Foxworth Investments Limited; Second Defender: 3052775 Nova Scotia Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Property / Insolvency / First Instance Judgment After Proof
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Gratuitous Alienation, Unfair Preference, Standard Security, Reduction of Disposition, Good Faith Acquisition, Attribution of Knowledge, Burden of Proof
Insolvency Property Law Company Law Gratuitous Alienation Unfair Preference Standard Security Reduction of Disposition Good Faith Acquisition +2 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Purdon Henderson

Pursuer

Foxworth Investments Limited

First Defender

3052775 Nova Scotia Limited

Second Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Property / Insolvency / First Instance Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the standard security granted by NSL in favour of Foxworth is void and unenforceable
  2. 2 Whether Foxworth acquired rights under the standard security in good faith and for value
  3. 3 Whether the disposition from LGDC to NSL was for adequate consideration or a gratuitous alienation

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to establish that Foxworth did not acquire the standard security in good faith and for value. The evidence did not support the pursuer's contention that the transaction was a sham or that Foxworth had knowledge that would vitiate good faith. The disposition to NSL was not proved to be for inadequate consideration. Accordingly, the standard security is not void or unenforceable.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • The pursuer's action for declarator and reduction of the standard security is refused.