Image from Google Jackets

Mavis Valerie Chittenden and others v Andrew J Pepper and others

Language: English Publication details: 2006Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2006] EWHC 1511 (Ch), 26 June 2006. Concerns the valuation of an unascertained and unliquidated debt at £1 under Insolvency Rules 1986 by the chairman of a creditors' meeting. Newlands (Seaford) Educational Trust provided education for children in premises leased from C, and was required under the terms of the lease to keep the property in good repair. When C prepared a schedule of dilapidations and sent it to N, N disputed liability. N went into administration owing to insolvency, and administrator P proposed a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) whereby another company would purchase N's assets and C would be excluded from the list of creditors. C voted against the CVA, but the chairman operated Insolvency Rules 1986 to value C's claim at £1. "Held": in the instant case it was impossible to conclude that some minimum value should be treated as admitted, therefore the chairman had no option but to refuse to put any higher value on C's claim.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 134178-1001

[2006] EWHC 1511 (Ch), 26 June 2006. Concerns the valuation of an unascertained and unliquidated debt at £1 under Insolvency Rules 1986 by the chairman of a creditors' meeting. Newlands (Seaford) Educational Trust provided education for children in premises leased from C, and was required under the terms of the lease to keep the property in good repair. When C prepared a schedule of dilapidations and sent it to N, N disputed liability. N went into administration owing to insolvency, and administrator P proposed a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) whereby another company would purchase N's assets and C would be excluded from the list of creditors. C voted against the CVA, but the chairman operated Insolvency Rules 1986 to value C's claim at £1. "Held": in the instant case it was impossible to conclude that some minimum value should be treated as admitted, therefore the chairman had no option but to refuse to put any higher value on C's claim.