46. When part of Kirkdene was sold, I understand that something of the order of 900,000 was realised. He referred to alternatives that might instead have been pursued. Under the auction contract the full balance of the purchase price is payable on completion. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Well, let me see. MR HUNTER: I didn't realise I had to, sir, they're public footpaths, they're nothing to do with me, sir. At all material times the First Defendant, Mr Robert Hunter, has been the freehold owner of that land. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Right. This decision, together with an academic article written by Roy Goode, [1] is sometimes looked upon as the turning point in relation to the stricter requirements in relation to . National Westminster Bank Plc v Hunter and Another: ChD 23 Nov 2011 - swarb.co.uk National Westminster Bank Plc v Hunter and Another: ChD 23 Nov 2011 Reasons for dismissal of claim under section 91. That condition is in extra special condition 11 which is in these terms: "11.1, the condition will be satisfied on the date that the seller has informed the buyer that the cattle that were on the lot as at the date of the auction as shown on the sale of memorandum, the auction date, has been removed. Clause 3 of the charge is headed "Restrictions on charging, leasing, disposing and parting with possession". Also taking into account that I am still in possession of Manor Farm, Pitchcott, proof of funding can certainly be provided for a part payment up-front with a second charge in 12 months' time and I am happy to negotiate a figure with yourself that would acceptable to the bank and to myself. No, sir, I think the Court's been unfair and unjust, sir, and I think there are factual statements that I've made, sir, today that have been misinterpreted and also the second application is whether you've given the power to stop me seeing my cattle that the bank has no charge, I don't believe this Court has that power, sir. There are one or two matters of suggested legal principle which are identified in a skeleton argument which has been prepared by or on behalf of Mr Hunter. He has, on the face of it -- although it is not for today for me to decide -- deliberately broken orders of the Court seeking to gain advantage by his breach. 4. Do you want to say anything about the points of details save for the general points? The resulting figure was 930,000. Our 67,404 banking and credit card complaints stem from our 26 million accounts. Right, any other point on the draft order? In that sense it was to be a 100 per cent mortgage. The last thing he wanted to do was to contract at an auction to sell the property, but in law that is precisely what he has done. So under these contracts Mr Hunter on the face of it was contracting to sell land which was subject to a charge charging a liability to pay a sum of money well in excess of 2.5 million for a purchase price of 930,000. v. Arthur Young McClelland Moores & Co. (Practice Note) . For the sake of completeness I will start with the contracts of February 2011, although the position there is essentially the same as with the contracts of 14th July 2011 in favour of K Hunter and Sons Limited. He has deliberately, in breach of Court orders, refused to do so to gain an advantage by his unlawful conduct. 16. 23. Let me see what Mr Hunter says about those two matters and his application for permission. The bank has prepared a detailed chronology of those communications for the purposes of this hearing. National Westminster Home Loans Ltd. Nationwide Building Society. On that date at around 12.18 pm, Mr Hunter sent an e-mail to the bank. The sale memorandum records that the seller is Mr Hunter acting by his Receivers. National Westminster Bank Football Club is a football club based in Beckenham, England. So I do not think there is any inconsistency in the order. That state of affairs has come about because Mr Hunter has continued to act unlawfully by having his cattle on the land, no doubt seeking to make a nuisance of himself and no doubt hoping that he will interfere with the contract for sale in favour of Mr Taylor's company. Read the full decision in Mrs L . While he has tended to the cattle it may be that the bank has not done anything to interfere with or tend to the cattle itself. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: There is a Court of Appeal. National Westminster Bank Ltd v Halesowen Presswork & Assemblies Ltd [1972] AC 785 is a decision of the House of Lords in relation to a banker's right to combine accounts under English law. Adam Billey. Players. The land which is the subject of the sale contract entered into at the auction is the land the subject of the charges. First of all, under the auction contract the Receivers were entitled to receive and have received a 10 per cent deposit. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: I think what I will do is I will shorten the time for you to serve an appellant's notice from 21 days to 14 days. No such deposit was on offer from K Hunter and Sons Limited. This offer is open for acceptance until 4.30 p.m. 11. Should they be successful in Court, which is likely to take six months or more, their tenancies on Manor Farm, Pitchcott will inevitably devalue the properties by up to 50 per cent. National Westminster Bank Plc v Spectrum Plus Ltd & Ors (2005) Summary. MR HUNTER: Yeah, I'd like to appeal it, please, sir. The bank replied in these terms: "Given the proximity of the property being offered for sale at auction, I do not propose to consider your proposal today. MISS WINDSOR: In which case it [inaudible] the penal notice will attach to that too. For every 1,000 home finance loans that we had outstanding, we received five complaints. I would be minded to make an order that he do it straight away while he is here, otherwise he will seek to take advantage of the difficulty in tracking him down, which may take a few days. National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Ltd and others [2005] UKHL 41 Practical Law Case Page D-000-1223 (Approx. Raheem Bucknor. Click here to remove this judgment from your profile. So in Mr Hunter's favour I determine that he is a person interested in the right of redemption. It is possible this bank is of similar date and by the same architect. The last statement in the letter from UK Farm Finance Limited was, I repeat, that funds were available for draw down as at 14th July 2011. On the other hand, he is in person. Lanre Akanni. ", 27. Is that a point to ask? You will also now be aware of the two papers served at Aylesbury County Court on Monday, 11th July 2011 by Mr Oldham and Mr Malt, who intend to establish their proprietal rights over Manor Farm, Pitchcott. MISS WINDSOR: I invite you to make the order as drafted, save at paragraph 3 (ii) be replaced by some machinery for Mr Hunter to sign the draft as handed up to your Lordship instead. 22. Because, of course, first of all the application would be considered on paper and then Mr Hunter would have a possible right to renew his application orally. The judge adjourned the application to be relisted at the next available date after 20th July 2011.". Under the charge by way of legal mortgage the mortgagor was Mr Hunter and the bank was National Westminster Bank Plc. National Carriers v Panalpina [1981] A.C. 675 National Westminster Bank v Morgan [1985] AC 686 Nicholl and Knight v Ashton, Eldridge & Co [1901] 2 KB 126 Niersmans v Pesticcio [2004] WTLR 699 . We have discussed paragraph 3. It is some considerable time since the Receivers have been appointed and they have acted as such during that period of time. 01-11-2022 Summary of outcome On 10 October 2022, the High Court handed down its judgment in the appeal of Steiner v National Westminster Bank plc [2022] EWHC 2519. It is also the case that there have been further applications to the Court and eventually Mr and Mrs Hunter did leave the land, that is they ceased to reside on any part of the land or buildings. Miss Windsor, is there a point about public footpaths that needs to be considered? Mr Hunter told me that the amount of money to be borrowed from UK Farm Finance Limited was not less than 1.55 million. The Court of Appeal is there to correct errors made by judges such as myself. 72. Hunter, Dan 13 13 1 13 Key, Jono 1 1 14 Macdougal, Ewan 12 . Although Mr Hunter has entered into conflicting contracts, it may very well be the case due to the connection with K Hunter and Sons Limited that it will not sue Mr Hunter for damages because he is unable to perform those contracts. Mr Hunter may be right that in the past and up to today he has been in control of the cattle because he has continued in breach of the Court orders to trespass on the relevant land and tend to the cattle. Paragraphs 4 and 5 they are to sell the stock. National Westminster Bank Plc - Ventures. That is in accordance with the normal position in charges of this kind. It seems to me incumbent on the mortgagor to seek from the High Court any relief which that Court is empowered to give before the possession warrant takes effect.". The bank appointed Receivers in relation to all of the charged property on 14th January 2010. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: You do not want an order for costs? 83. So for all those reasons I will abridge time to 14 days. This time the contracts provide for the property to be sold for 1.55 million, but the debt secured by the charge over the properties is again, roughly speaking, 2.5 million to 3 million. 91. If you want to have some sort of suspension or stay you will have to go to the Court of Appeal at an oral hearing probably and ask for them to be modified. We use necessary cookies to make our site work. Papamichael v National Westminster Bank Plc & Anor [2002]1 Lloyd's Rep 332 31 Jan 2002 Share Direct link Share on Andrew Hunter KC Call: 1993 Silk: 2012 About us Find us Clerks & staff Academic research panel News, cases & analysis Podcasts Client Area Competition Bulletin Sports Law Bulletin Employee Competition Bulletin Covid-19: Legal Insights We confirm that the funds would be available to you pursuant to the loan facility offered to have enabled you to complete an agreement for the purchase of the property upon completion of the necessary conveyancing formalities. England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division), National Westminster Bank Plc v Hunter & Anor. National Westminster v Morgan [1985] AC 686 by Will Chen 2.I or your money back Check out our premium contract notes! Published 2 March 2022 Explore the topic. MISS WINDSOR: The relevant provisions are CPR 52.4, page 1541 of the White Book. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Right. Ethan Crane . 56. In my judgment it is clear that Mr Hunter has been and remains a person interested in the right of redemption. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Do you have it in a form that he could sign straight away? In other words, UK Farm Finance Limited were at least advancing the full amount of the intended purchase price of the land. On the other hand, Mr Hunter, who is a stock farmer, has left upon the land a number of cattle, I think some 90 or so, although as a result of recent developments the number of cattle on the land today I understand is 3 cows. Newcote Services Limited. But the land has been sold by contract to Mr Taylor's company. They are in force. Jurisdiction code: Breach of Contract, Disability Discrimination, Maternity and Pregnancy Rights, Sex Discrimination. It provided for payment of a deposit of 1. The bank brought possession proceedings against Mr and Mrs Hunter. Miss Windsor in the course of her submissions said that the debt and charges etcetera amounted to some 3 million. It was paid by cheque and the cheque has cleared. In June 2018, judgment was handed down dismissing Mr Broomhead (the "Claimant" )'s claim against National Westminster Bank plc (the "First Defendant") and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (the "Second Defendant") concerning the Claimant's business banking relationship with the First Defendant. National Wesminster Bank PLC. GBX. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: I am making an order that you do not go on that land. Unfortunately, based on what I have seen, the possibility of contempt of Court and committal proceedings does appear to be a real one and in the circumstances I am persuaded that I should make the order making committal proceedings operate more smoothly than might otherwise be the case. However, at the hearing Mr Hunter has referred to a subsequent letter dated 29th July 2011 from UK Farm Finance Limited to K Hunter and Sons Limited. The consequence of that will be that the only contract that Mr Hunter is able to perform is the one in favour of Mr Taylor's company. When the mortgagee executes that TR2 Mr Taylor's company will take the title free from the charge. 68. My submission would be that even if there is there is no reason why the Court should not injunct the First Defendant from using it. Taxpayer stake in Natwest reduced again as government sells shares. What Mr Hunter has not confronted in his application, nor indeed in the course of his submissions to me, is what the effect of that would be in relation to the contract which he has made with Mr Taylor's company. Get 2 points on providing a valid reason for the above Mr Hunter has raised a number of questions today in argument as to the way in which the bank or the Receivers went about the sale of part of Kirkdene. Following Palk v Mortgages Services Funding, the court will not grant an order for possession for PB if Jakob is seeking sale of the property. MISS WINDSOR: It may be that my instructing solicitors will apply for the transcript, but they cannot apply to the Court of Appeal for an expedited hearing until such time as the appeal is underway. MISS WINDSOR: I am instructed to ask for the standard order for costs to be assessed if not agreed. 74. So that is the order. Those proceedings were started in the Aylesbury County Court by a claim form dated 29th June 2010. The seller there is again Mr Hunter. Well, I will deal with that in a moment. National Westminster Bank PLC v Spectrum Plus Ltd (2004) Summary. 86. A charge over book debts in a debenture which required the proceeds of the book debts to be paid into an account with the bank but placed no restriction on the use that could be made of the balance on the account thereafter was a floating and not a fixed charge, Siebe Gorman & Co Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd (1979) 2 Lloyd's . I will refer to the buyer as Mr Taylor's company. [1977] A.C. 1, and Hunter v. Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police [1982] A.C. 529 are obiter indorsements of obiter dicta, so far as the vital words are concerned, and only Lord Hailsham of St. Marylebone . Then there is the question of funding. 2 storeys and attic. Sat 11 Feb 23. As I have indicated the contracts of February 2011 were not completed. So again absent intervention from the Court, Mr Hunter is not able to perform his obligations under that contract. Since the making of the order for possession a number of things have happened, not all of which I need recite. You will just have to be patient a little longer. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Paragraph 3 is you are to deliver everything up. The position under the auction contract is radically different. 15. Court grants injunction, despite noting that was fairly unreasonable and . 33. Prima facie, if the same person enters into two contracts for the sale of the same piece of land both contracts are binding in the law of contract, although there is a plain inconsistency between them and the Court may have to determine what remedies to give to which purchaser and in what circumstances. The contracts of 23rd February 2011 have not been completed. Sat 18 Feb 23. 11.2, if the condition has not be satisfied within six months of the auction date then either the buyer or the seller can serve notice on the other to terminate this contract. Further, under section 12(1)(a) Mr Hunter is already in breach of an obligation to take delivery of the cattle. On 26th August 2011 Mr Hunter applied in the Aylesbury Count Court for the following order -- I read from the application notice: "Application to permit me to complete a contract entered into in February 2011, varied on 14th July 2011, to sell Maple Barn, two barn conversions, farm buildings and 104 acres of farmland to K Hunter and Sons Limited for 1.55 million." Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest. Clause 8 of the contract is headed "Matters affecting the property". Shares were issued on the sending of the allotment letter, not when the shares came to be registered in the company's books. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: He is a member of the public and the public has the right. You are also aware that there is waste contaminated by asbestos that has to be removed by 2nd August 2011, which is a condition set by the enforcement notice served by Aylesbury Vale District Council. In the suit brought by the beneficiaries it was held by the chancery division that once the trust account was opened, the . In these circumstances, if it is a relevant question to ask whether the Receivers did the right thing when they took the property to auction and sold it at auction, as compared with cancelling the auction and continuing to talk to Mr Hunter, my conclusion is that they plainly and unarguably took the better course. National Westminster Bank, byname NatWest, former British bank holding company with branches and subbranches in the United Kingdom and operations across the world. The other matter concerns the way in which the payment was to be made. I say that because this case does not turn upon which contract is first in time. As a matter of simple mathematics that is a higher figure than the price to be paid under the auction contract of 1.505 million. Since the possession action began and since the possession order was made t here has rightly been a great deal of communication between the bank and Mr Hunter. It is not said that those sums were available to K Hunter and Sons Limited, I was told K Hunter and Sons Limited had no assets apart possibly from the benefit of the contract to which I have referred. I have explained why he is not in a position to perform the other contracts in favour of K Hunter and Sons Limited. That was made on 23rd February 2011. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: You cannot fail to understand that. 6 bay facade. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: So you want an order for today? MR JUSTICE MORGAN: I think the position is this, that the bank and the Receivers, for reasons that appear to be good ones, have given up on you, Mr Hunter. Listing NGR: SE2637427830 That certainly means that Mr Hunter is not able to convey title to the charged property to a third party. First of all, to bring the present unsatisfactory state of affairs to end I will make an specific order backed with a penal notice that Mr Hunter and anyone acting on his behalf must not enter upon any part of the property or move or bring any cattle or any livestock or other chattels onto the property. It may be that by reason of what is happening on the land, completion with Mr Taylor's company will not be in five days' time, it may be it will happen in late December or January, but that has come about not because Mr Taylor's company has required that and has only been prepared to bargain on that basis, but because Mr Hunter -- in breach I have to say of an order of the Court -- has manoeuvred himself to produce that adverse consequence. MISS WINDSOR: Might I flag up simply that insofar as he does [inaudible] an application for permission to appeal, in a moment I shall be inviting your Lordship to abridge time. By Clause 1.1 of the charge Mr Hunter charged by way of legal mortgage the property which I have described as the subject of the charge. National Westminster Bank Ltd v Halesowen Presswork & Assemblies Ltd In National Westminster Bank Ltd v Halesowen Presswork & Assemblies Ltd [1972] AC 785 it was held that an agreement between a bank and its customer that the debit on one account could not be set off against the credit on another account was void. Is that clear? Perhaps more relevantly, there was no evidence to support the suggested funding made available in the course of 14th July 2011 even though the bank asked for such evidence in express terms. 43. 76. I have not been asked to grant a stay of any of the orders, but if I were asked I would refuse to grant a stay, which means that Mr Hunter would have to go to the Court of Appeal and seek to obtain a stay there. 62. It is only if one takes into account both contracts that one gets an aggregate price of 1.55 million. Having considered the effect of the conflicting contracts which exist and the challenge which Mr Hunter has raised to the conduct of the Receivers, I can now go to the ultimate issue which is whether the Court should exercise the jurisdiction it has which would enable Mr Hunter to sell the land to K Hunter and Sons Limited free from the charge, placing himself in breach of the contract with Mr Taylor's company, or whether the Court should make no such order. The mortgagor put forward a number of reasons why the mortgagor should have conduct of the sale, one of those perceived benefits was that the mortgagor could remain in possession and resist an order for possession or the enforcement of an order for possession in favour of the mortgagee. I assume any potential bidders are aware of the above information as they should be. It does not seem to me to be necessary to adjourn this hearing to hear from Mr Taylor's company. MISS WINDSOR: Although that does not have to be included in the bundle. 71. 55. National Westminster Bank Plc (1968-date), established in London, is part of NatWest Group. During the afternoon of 14th July 2011 the firm of Allsops, well-known surveyors and auctioneers, auctioned the land at The Park Lane Hotel, Piccadilly, London, W1. 52. It seems to me to be an unnecessary step to require the bank to serve a notice on Mr Hunter requiring him to remove the cattle else they will be sold. If Mr Hunter seeks to continue the conduct he will place himself in very grave peril of being put in prison for a period of time which will bring home to him the consequences of his conduct. In other words, you have to do this very rapidly indeed if you are to do anything at all. Against that background, Mr Hunter asks the Court to order a sale of the property and in particular a sale which will be a sale by Mr Hunter to K Hunter and Sons Limited pursuant to the pair of contracts of 14th July 2011. The Claimant claimed damages . In that correspondence it seemed to be common ground that K Hunter and Sons Limited or Mr Hunter were not in a position to pay the full amount of the purchase price at or around that time, indeed it would be necessary for an unspecified part of the purchase price to remain outstanding on mortgage for 12 months. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave your message here. MR HUNTER: Sir, I'll be taking legal advice, sir. The bank, National Westminster Bank Plc, is involved with the land and buildings to which I have referred pursuant to two legal charges, one dated 6th July 2006 and the second dated 12th April 2007. The contracts provided for the buyer to take the land free from the bank's charge. BRIGHOUSE BRADFORD ROAD, BRIGHOUSE. Orr. I am also asked to make orders providing for service in connection with possible committal applications. . The mortgagor's obligations were defined earlier in the document as all of the mortgagor's liability to the bank of any kind. It is pursuant to an application notice of 21st October 2011. Mr Hunter says that the cattle are in his possession, they are under his control, they are not in the possession of the bank, they are not under the control of the bank. The next matter to which I need to refer is the fact that the contracts made on 23rd February 2011 have been amended in a way to which I will refer. Secondly, I will order that by a very early point, which will be 4 p.m. on Thursday, 24th November 2011, that Mr Hunter deliver to the bank and/or the Receivers all existing cattle passports and all other relevant documentation spelt out in the draft order that relate to the cattle. The Court of Appeal was in no doubt that in a case where everyone agreed the property should be sold that it was not appropriate to use the jurisdiction of section 91(2) to override the mortgagee's exercise of its power of sale. 2 - 0 Beckenham FC. You are able to go to a Lord Justice and say to the Lord Justice what you want to say, but I do not give you permission to appeal. 73. I have referred to the land which is the subject matter of the charge. 92. 78. I was referred to a further authority on the operation of the sub-section, namely Cheltenham and Gloucester Plc v. Krausz [1997] 1 WLR 1558. 79. Royal Trust Bank v National Westminster Bank plc [1996] BCC 613 was a decision of the Court of Appeal in relation to the nature of a floating charge . P 9. Nestle v National Westminster Bank: ChD 1988. Ctrl + Alt + T to open/close . MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Well, I am giving you an opportunity, which you do not have to take, of raising any point of detail on the drafting of the order. Mr Hunter has put before me a written argument prepared for him by solicitors whom he has consulted which puts forward the rival point of view. The plaintiff was the remainder beneficiary under the will trust of her grandfather, who died in 1922. It is not necessary I think to go to every difference and attempt to resolve it. The copy of the sale memorandum produced to the Court does not identify the buyer, although one can see that the signature on behalf of the buyer was that of a C Taylor. What do you say I should do? 40. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: As to the appeal, which bits do you want to appeal? The contract provides for title to pass to the purchaser pursuant to a Land Registry transfer form, in form TR2, which is to be executed by National Westminster Bank Plc as transferor pursuant to the legal charges. 5. This case. It is fair to say that the impression given by the two chronologies is somewhat different. 13. MISS WINDSOR: 52.4(2): "The appellant must file the appellant's notice at the appeal court within such period as may be directed by the lower court or where the court makes no such direction 21 days after the date of the decision of the lower court that the appellant wishes to appeal." There is a second application before the Court----. 82. So shall we talk about the first and start with you, Miss Windsor? Nestle v. National Westminster Bank plc ; Soud : Odvolac soud : Rozhodnuto : 6. kvtna 1992 : Citace [1992] EWCA Civ 12 , [1993] 1 WLR 1260 Historie ppadu ; Pedchoz akce [2000] WTLR 795; Independent, 4. ervence 1988, (1996) 10 (1) Trust law International 113, 115 12. We pride ourselves on our independence, and our human touch. 142.75. On the other hand, this matter has gone on for a considerable time and you have failed to comply with Court orders in the past. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Well, I think, Mr Hunter, given the cleverness of your point that you had better put in some evidence on which I can act that there is a public footpath and then apply to vary the order in relation to it and that will be considered. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Shall I hear what he says about that first? The contracts of 23rd February 2011 separately relating to land at Manor Farm and land at Kirkdene have had the dates of the contracts on the cover sheet and within the body of the contract changed from 23rd February 2011 to 14th July 2011. Turning then to the position of Mr Taylor's company, the Court has not been given evidence as to the position of that company or the people standing behind it. Can I appeal that you're only giving me two weeks as a litigant in person to appeal, sir? The position is that the contract which has come into existence following the auction is between Mr Hunter as seller, acting through the Receivers, and Mr Taylor's company, but when it comes to the transfer of title pursuant to that contact title will not be transfered by a transfer executed by Mr Hunter as transferor, it will instead be transfered pursuant to a transfer executed by the bank as chargee. The definition continues but it is not necessary for me to read it out. The charge is a defined phrase which enables one to see it is a reference to the charges in favour of National Westminster Bank, to which I have referred. MR JUSTICE MORGAN: Right. Because he is unable to perform them they will not be performed and title will be available to be transferred to Mr Taylor's company. The case of Rowlandson and others v. National Westminster Bank Limited, provides an example of such situation. As I will describe in due course, part of the land the subject of the charge of 12th April 2007 has more recently been sold, but the remainder of that land remains subject to that charge. I will consider the effect of these contracts without regard to the impact of section 91(2) and the I will consider the possible impact of the statutory provision. MR HUNTER: And again factual information in my witness statements haven't been taken account of, sir. 57. That decision of the Court of Appeal was followed at first instance in Polonski v. Lloyds Bank Mortgages Limited (1997) 31 Housing Law Reports, 721.

Bob Shannon Becton Dickinson, Renpho Scale Change To Stones On Scales, Pedestrian Hit By Car Yesterday In Connecticut, Articles N