Abbey National Plc v Arthur & Anor [1999] ScotCS 245 (21 October 1999)

Abbey National Plc v Arthur & Anor [1999] ScotCS 245 (21 October 1999)

The rights of the pursuers as heritable creditors were not affected by the sequestration of the defenders' estates, and the decree and warrant for ejection and interdict were valid and enforceable. The action was properly brought against the defenders, and there was no requirement to proceed against the trustee in bankruptcy.

Citation
[1999] ScotCS 245
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: Abbey National Plc; First Defender: Douglas Andrew Arthur; Second Defender and Appellant: Charlotte Liston Sutherland
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 October 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Summary Decree and Interdict Granted by Sheriff
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Heritable Security, Eviction, Bankruptcy and Sequestration, Secured Creditor Rights, Interdict
Property Law Bankruptcy Law Heritable Security Eviction Bankruptcy and Sequestration Secured Creditor Rights Interdict

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abbey National Plc

Pursuer and Respondent

Douglas Andrew Arthur

First Defender

Charlotte Liston Sutherland

Second Defender and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Summary Decree and Interdict Granted by Sheriff

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether decree and warrant for ejection and interdict were invalid due to sequestration of defenders' estates
  2. 2 Whether action should have been brought against trustee in bankruptcy rather than defenders personally

Ratio Decidendi

The rights of the pursuers as heritable creditors were not affected by the sequestration of the defenders' estates, and the decree and warrant for ejection and interdict were valid and enforceable. The action was properly brought against the defenders, and there was no requirement to proceed against the trustee in bankruptcy.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused

Orders

  • The appeal by the second defender is refused.