GARETH DAVID PETERS AND MRS CAROLINE ELLEN PETERS AGAINST BELHAVEN FINANCE Ltd [2016] ScotSC 37 (06 May 2016)

GARETH DAVID PETERS AND MRS CAROLINE ELLEN PETERS AGAINST BELHAVEN FINANCE Ltd [2016] ScotSC 37 (06 May 2016)

Although the defenders failed in their statutory duty to adequately advertise the sale of the repossessed hotel, this failure did not affect the price achieved, which reflected the best price reasonably obtainable in the prevailing market conditions. No loss to the pursuers was established.

Citation
[2016] ScotSC 37
Parties
Pursuer: Gareth David Peters; Pursuer: Mrs Caroline Ellen Peters; Defender: Belhaven Finance Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Repossession/heritable Security / Judgment After Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Defenders assoilzied (absolved) from the craves of the writ; no liability to pursuers established.
Legal Topics
Repossession, Standard Security, Duty to Advertise, Best Price Obligation, Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (scotland) Act 1970 S.25
Property Law Secured Lending Civil Procedure Repossession Standard Security Duty to Advertise Best Price Obligation Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (scotland) Act 1970 S.25

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

Parties

Gareth David Peters

Pursuer

Mrs Caroline Ellen Peters

Pursuer

Belhaven Finance Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Repossession/heritable Security / Judgment After Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the defenders fulfil their statutory duty to advertise the sale of repossessed property under s.25 of the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970?
  2. 2 Did the defenders obtain the best price reasonably obtainable for the property?

Ratio Decidendi

Although the defenders failed in their statutory duty to adequately advertise the sale of the repossessed hotel, this failure did not affect the price achieved, which reflected the best price reasonably obtainable in the prevailing market conditions. No loss to the pursuers was established.

Court Disposition

Defenders assoilzied (absolved) from the craves of the writ; no liability to pursuers established.

Orders

  • Question of expenses reserved; parties appointed to be heard on expenses.