Henderson (Liquidator of Letham Grange Development Co Ltd) v. 3052775 Nova Scotia Ltd [2004] ScotCS 98 (21 April 2004)

Henderson (Liquidator of Letham Grange Development Co Ltd) v. 3052775 Nova Scotia Ltd [2004] ScotCS 98 (21 April 2004)

The defenders failed to provide authentic, contemporaneous evidence that the alleged transfer of debt formed part of the consideration for the disposition. The only documented consideration was the cash sum. The defence was dilatory and not genuine. The pursuer was entitled to summary decree reducing the disposition as a gratuitous alienation under section 242 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 98
Parties
Pursuer: Matthew Purdon Henderson CA (the Liquidator of Letham Grange Development Co. Ltd.); Defender: 3052775 Nova Scotia Ltd.
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Decree Motion After Amendment and Remit From Inner House
Outcome
summary decree granted for the pursuer; disposition reduced
Legal Topics
Gratuitous Alienation, Reduction of Disposition, Adequacy of Consideration, Summary Decree, Liquidation
Insolvency Property Law Company Law Gratuitous Alienation Reduction of Disposition Adequacy of Consideration Summary Decree Liquidation

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Purdon Henderson CA (the Liquidator of Letham Grange Development Co. Ltd.)

Pursuer

3052775 Nova Scotia Ltd.

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Decree Motion After Amendment and Remit From Inner House

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disposition of property by Letham Grange Development Co. Ltd. to 3052775 Nova Scotia Ltd. was a gratuitous alienation under section 242 of the Insolvency Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether there was adequate consideration for the disposition
  3. 3 Whether the defenders had a genuine defence to the pursuer's claim

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders failed to provide authentic, contemporaneous evidence that the alleged transfer of debt formed part of the consideration for the disposition. The only documented consideration was the cash sum. The defence was dilatory and not genuine. The pursuer was entitled to summary decree reducing the disposition as a gratuitous alienation under section 242 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Court Disposition

summary decree granted for the pursuer; disposition reduced

Orders

  • Defenders' second and third pleas-in-law repelled
  • Pursuer's first plea-in-law sustained