UK: Finance Litigation: Recent Cases And Issues In January 2019

Last Updated: 11 January 2019
Article by Ian Weatherall, Turon Miah and Jane Bates

Creditor not obliged to take steps in foreign proceedings to preserve security

We first reported on the decision in General Mediterranean Holding SA.SPF v (1) Qucomhaps Holdings Ltd, (2) Harkin, (3) Awni Abu-Taha in July 2017. In brief, the claimant advanced sums to the first defendant secured by a pledge of shares and a charge over a Czech company (S) and personal guarantees from the second defendant. The claimant issued proceedings to recover the loans under the guarantees. By this time, S had gone into administration and the defendants argued that the claimant's failure to file a claim as a secured creditor in S's administration had enabled S's assets to be released to alleged fraudsters rendering the security worthless. The defendants argued that the claimant owed them an equitable obligation to take reasonable steps to protect its rights, and the rights of the defendants, in relation to the security and its failure to do so thereby released the defendants from their liability to the claimant. The claimant successfully applied to strike out the defence and counterclaim. The defendants appealed.

The Court of Appeal refused the appeal. It held that whilst a creditor who had security available for the payment and satisfaction of the debt had to do whatever was necessary to make that security properly available, there could be no question of a creditor having an absolute duty to ensure that a surety could have recourse to that security. A creditor could not be obliged to incur any sizeable expenditure or to run any significant risk to preserve or maintain a security. Further, it was doubtful whether a creditor could ever have an equitable duty to the principal debtor, as opposed to a surety, to take steps to preserve or maintain a security granted by a third party. The defendants had no real prospects of defending the claim.

Things to consider

It is established law that a creditor's release of other security or guarantees, or failure to perfect security, may discharge a guarantor, at least to some degree. It is for this reason that a properly drafted guarantee should provide protective wording along the lines that that guarantor's liability will not be reduced, discharged or otherwise adversely affected by any act or omission of the creditor in taking up, perfecting or enforcing any security.

Income Payment Order survives later bankruptcy order

The High Court has recently held that a discharged bankrupt's obligations under an Income Payment Order (IPO) to make future payments survived a later bankruptcy order.

In Azuonye v Kent (trustee in bankruptcy of Azuonye), Azuonye was made bankrupt in April 2015. An application for an IPO was made under s 310 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (the IA) immediately before Azuonye's automatic discharge from bankruptcy in April 2016 and was granted in November 2016. Azuonye was made bankrupt again (by his own petition) in December 2017. Azuonye claimed that the second bankruptcy order automatically discharged his obligations under the IPO.

The High Court held that it was clear from s 310 of the IA that an IPO may continue in place after the bankruptcy is discharged and that the court has continued power to review it. S 335(2) of the IA indicated, or at least assumed, that amounts under an IPO continue to be payable where an undischarged bankrupt is made bankrupt again. However, s 335(2) makes no reference to where the bankrupt has been discharged prior to the subsequent bankruptcy. The court held that the IPO is a statutory mechanism that Parliament could not have intended would be affected by s 285(3) of the IA as it would be a strange result if a discharged bankrupt, but not an undischarged bankrupt, could avoid an IPO by making himself bankrupt again. Appropriate protection was provided with the court's power to vary the IPO. Further, the fact that future payments under an IPO were inherently uncertain (due to the court's power to vary them), meant they were not provable debts under s 285(3) of the IA in the second bankruptcy.

Things to consider

The decision confirms that bankrupts cannot escape their obligations under an IPO by making themselves (or becoming) bankrupt for a second or subsequent time. The appropriate manner in which to address the relationship between a first and second bankruptcy is to vary the IPO made in the first bankruptcy.

Mortgagee's duty to get best price reasonably obtainable for security

The High Court has recently provided a summary of the relevant legal principles applicable to the relationship between a mortgagee and mortgagor where the mortgagee sells mortgaged assets.

In Close Brothers Ltd v AIS (Marine) 2 Ltd (in liquidation) and Chandler, the first defendant ship owner (AIS) obtained a loan of EUR 2.247 million from the claimant bank secured against its vessel. Chandler acted as guarantor. AIS fell into arrears and the claimant repossessed and sold the vessel for £1.7 million through an independent broker. The claimant brought proceedings to recover the shortfall from the defendants. Chandler defended the proceedings on the basis that no further money was owed to the claimant as it had sold the vessel at an undervalue in breach of its duty to obtain the best price reasonably obtainable.

The High Court summarised the relevant legal principles as follows:

  • The mortgagee of a ship owed the same duty of care in relation to the sale as any other mortgagee owes;
  • The mortgagee owes a duty in equity to take reasonable care to obtain the best price reasonably obtainable at the time;
  • The mortgagee is liable to the mortgagor if he fails to act with reasonable care to obtain a proper price. The timing and manner of sale is a matter for the mortgagee, but the property must be fairly and properly exposed to the market, absent cases of real urgency;
  • A mortgagee will not be in default unless he is 'plainly on the wrong side of the line'. A true market value can have an acceptable margin of error;
  • The mortgagee must behave as a reasonable man would behave in realisation of his own property so that the mortgagor may receive credit for the fair value of the property sold;
  • If the mortgagee breaches his duty, the remedy is not common law damages, but an order that the mortgagee account to the mortgagor, not for what he actually received, but for what he should have received;
  • The mortgagee must act fairly to the mortgagor. He can protect his own interests but he is not entitled to conduct himself in a way which unfairly prejudices the mortgagor. He must take reasonable care to maximise his return from the property;
  • The mortgagee owes the same duty to a guarantor;
  • The mortgagee's duty, to take care to sell for the best price reasonably obtainable, is not delegable. He does not perform his duty merely by appointing a reputable agent to conduct the sale;
  • The mortgagee is not entitled to act in a way which unfairly prejudices the mortgagor by selling hastily at a knock-down price sufficient to pay off the debt;
  • A sale at just above the sum required to discharge the mortgage may be looked at carefully by the court, although that may ultimately be the proper price or true market value;
  • The mortgagee cannot sell to itself, either alone or with others, or to a trustee for himself nor to anyone employed by him to conduct the sale unless the sale is ordered by the court and he has obtained permission to bid; and
  • Where the mortgagee sells to a connected person, the burden of proof is reversed and the mortgagee must prove that he took reasonable care to obtain the best price;

The court held that only if the vessel was sold at an undervalue would it then be relevant to consider whether that was as a result of the claimant having acted improperly. The burden of proof was on the defendant.

The court noted that the market for vessels such as the one in question could fluctuate rapidly and significantly and that it was rare for identical vessels to be exposed to the market at the same time. The court preferred the claimant's expert's valuation to the effect that the sale price, albeit perhaps on the low side, was in the appropriate bracket for the vessel when the sale took place and that it was unlikely that a higher price could have been achieved because of the state of the market at the relevant time. It also held that the claimant's ship broker had sufficiently exposed the vessel to the market albeit it had not been publically advertised for sale. The court did not therefore have to consider whether the claimant was in breach of any duty to achieve the best reasonable price.

Things to consider

The case is a useful reminder of the general principles relevant to the sale of secured assets by a mortgagee in possession. It is also a reminder that valuation is not a precise science, particularly where the assets are unusual and the market is restricted or depressed and evidence of directly comparable sales is scarce.

Statutory demand upheld as no genuine triable issue

In Wagner v White, White advanced interest free and unsecured loans to Wagner's company Powa Technologies PLC (Powa) under a Convertible Loan Facility Agreement (the Agreement). Wagner entered into a personal guarantee in relation to those loans. Under the Agreement, the loan could be called in upon specified events of default occurring, including Powa going into administration. Under the guarantee, Wagner agreed to pay on demand if Powa defaulted. Powa was subsequently placed into administration by its main funder (Wellington) and White called in the loan and the guarantee.

Just before the administration occurred, White was appointed a director of Powa. Some of Powa's assets were subsequently acquired by a new company (owned by White and Wellington) from the administrators.

Wagner did not pay under the guarantee and White served a statutory demand.

Wagner sought to set aside the statutory demand on the basis that White had caused Powa's default by persuading Wellington to appoint administrators whereas Wellington's preferred route had been to restructure Powa. Wagner alleged that White had acted in bad faith and to Wagner's prejudice and in breach of fiduciary duty.

At first instance the court refused to set the statutory demand aside finding there was no genuine triable issue as required by rule 6.5(4) of the Insolvency Rules 1986.

The High Court dismissed Wagner's appeal. It considered in some detail the contemporaneous documents and found there was no evidence to support the idea that Wellington was keen on restructuring POWA, rather than putting it into administration. There was no genuine triable issue that White caused Powa to go into administration by persuading Wellington that administration was a better option than restructuring. Whatever White's motivations and actions, they did not change the risk that Wagner had agreed to run when entering into the guarantee and so did not prejudice Wagner in an unfair way.

The court further held that even if White acted in breach of fiduciary duty (to act in the best interests of Powa and to avoid conflicts of interest) by advocating administration with a view to benefiting personally, there was no genuine triable issue that that caused Powa any loss because White did not cause, or materially contribute to, Wellington's decision to put Powa into administration. Powa did not have a cross-claim against White for either equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty or for damages for the tort of unlawful means conspiracy. The court therefore considered it unnecessary to determine whether there was any breach of fiduciary duty.

Things to consider

The case shows that the courts are willing to consider contemporaneous evidence in some detail, but without conducting an impermissible mini-trial on the documents, to determine whether there is a genuine triable issue, resulting in the statutory demand being set aside, as opposed to a merely arguable or fanciful claim.

Read the original article on GowlingWLG.com

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Events from this Firm
7 Nov 2019, Seminar, Birmingham, UK

Providing content specifically tailored to the needs of GCs and Heads of Legal working in government organisations and their affiliates.

14 Nov 2019, Seminar, London, UK

Providing content specifically tailored to the needs of GCs and Heads of Legal working in government organisations and their affiliates.

 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions