Webb Resolutions Ltd v. Glen & Anor [2009] ScotSC 46 (09 November 2009)

Webb Resolutions Ltd v. Glen & Anor [2009] ScotSC 46 (09 November 2009)

The sheriff was entitled, in the exercise of discretion, to refuse the reponing note as the appellants failed to provide a reasonable explanation for their non-appearance and did not present a stateable defence or credible plan to resolve the indebtedness. The proposed Mortgage to Rent Scheme was inadequate due to the shortfall and lack of lender consent, and the appellants' actions amounted to a delaying tactic rather than a genuine attempt to resolve the matter.

Citation
[2009] ScotSC 46
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: Webb Resolutions Limited; Defender and Appellant: Derek Robert Glen; Defender and Appellant: Miss Suzanne Elizabeth McIntosh
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Reponing Note Following Decree in Absence in Repossession Action
Outcome
Appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor adhered to; expenses of appeal awarded to respondents.
Legal Topics
Repossession, Standard Security, Reponing Note, Mortgage Rights (scotland) Act 2001, Sheriff Court Rules
Property Law Civil Procedure Repossession Standard Security Reponing Note Mortgage Rights (scotland) Act 2001 Sheriff Court Rules

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Webb Resolutions Limited

Pursuer and Respondent

Derek Robert Glen

Defender and Appellant

Miss Suzanne Elizabeth McIntosh

Defender and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Reponing Note Following Decree in Absence in Repossession Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in refusing the reponing note by the defenders in a repossession action under the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970
  2. 2 Whether the defenders had provided a stateable defence and adequate explanation for their failure to appear
  3. 3 Whether the sheriff exercised discretion appropriately under Rule 8.1 of the Sheriff Court Rules

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff was entitled, in the exercise of discretion, to refuse the reponing note as the appellants failed to provide a reasonable explanation for their non-appearance and did not present a stateable defence or credible plan to resolve the indebtedness. The proposed Mortgage to Rent Scheme was inadequate due to the shortfall and lack of lender consent, and the appellants' actions amounted to a delaying tactic rather than a genuine attempt to resolve the matter.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor adhered to; expenses of appeal awarded to respondents.

Orders

  • Refusal of appeal
  • Adherence to sheriff's interlocutor of 8 July 2009