Insolvency Statutory demand. The Chancery Division of the High Court, in considering an appeal from the refusal to set aside a statutory demand, found that there was no material difference between the two tests of 'real prospect of success' and 'genuine triable issue'. The test of 'genuine triable issue' in relation to r 6.5.4(b) of the Insolvency Rules 1986 was no less stringent than that of real prospect of success which applied to summary judgment.
Document ID:
32303131443230314D4159
Asociated Links:
a:2:{s:5:"title";s:14:"Find Judgments";s:12:"remoteLinkId";s:194:"LNECE2C1A13BBD83251AC63F6E076B9D4B1FD83B1FD70694EB909808A06D7EDA936CE186FAE3641DFD7E98F71B3D78CDA825F13D3A06DA0D2979F23C59B749752331105AC3D81B30220EA6B1A46FC815B0505219BBDF2C9D694A59C3146FFAE8E2";}
a:2:{s:5:"title";s:23:"Find Related Commentary";s:12:"remoteLinkId";s:226:"LNECE2C1A13BBD83251AC63F6E076B9D4B9ED049803389B5EA86580E0E2F7F43EE89C1853444CDEE9FA4CCA10FEB3597505094859963488B5C1938D43556C8C7D42D39CAAD28911C2ADDD178B3EC6EAA812B974BD0FD3602F41F4AC9A2E72E9909DE7DC499BD73C9DFB689A927D5B0B599";}
a:2:{s:5:"title";s:18:"Find AllER Reports";s:12:"remoteLinkId";s:194:"LNECE2C1A13BBD832502BBCDE46D29B7B37A02E495142796E31989D172B99429C0C5F2ED3F2A7211CFF4BD95E0F3D54B093B20FBA5DED526E2D246B92C80C6FC29DB59CAD0C1CF4CF543E4C9D37D67F56C2088B6C75884E3DFADFA280A43AEDB4E";}
a:2:{s:5:"title";s:18:"Find Related Cases";s:12:"remoteLinkId";s:226:"LNECE2C1A13BBD83251AC63F6E076B9D4B9ED049803389B5EA86580E0E2F7F43EE89C1853444CDEE9FA4CCA10FEB3597505094859963488B5C3BACDB50A2258C656C5B4999C0AF581087C2FADAD0ECA6CFC12E6E27527FD6828BB33D2EA046C561B8977C221B1E7CF73731154E59422D76";}
Language:
en
Country:
GB
Topic Code:
#LL000C43F#
#LL000A2R2#
#LL000A2R5#
#LL0008XOQ#
#LL00092VD#
#LL00092VF#
#LL000A2Q5#
#LL0008XOU#
#GB#PINT#
#GB#CONT#
#PA#PER#
#GB#CIVP#
Indexing Terms:
Lending
Summary Judgment & Strike Out
Pre-action
Civil Procedure & Administration of Justice
Judiciary
Litigation Procedure & Practice
Statutory Demand
Constitutional Law
Source Name:
All England Reporter
Jurisdiction:
EnglandandWales
Court:
0
Court Code:
ChD
Judgement Date:
Fri, 2011-05-20
Court Classify:
Chancery Division
Cite:
[2011] All ER (D) 201 (May)
Case Name:
*Abernethy v Hotbed Ltd
Judge:
Newey J (judgment delivered extempore)
Prosecution Counsel:
Tom Poole (instructed by W Davies) for the applicant.
Defendent Counsel:
Tiran Neressian (instructed by EMW Picton Howell LLP) for the respondent.
Catch Words:
Insolvency
Statutory demand
Setting aside statutory demand
Grounds on which statutory demand might be set aside
Debt disputed on substantial grounds
Test of genuine triable issue
Whether test of 'genuine triable issue' less stringent than test for summary judgment
Insolvency Rules 1986,
Parent nid:
May
Practice Area:
Personal Injury
Availability:
Locked
Top content:
No
Representation:
Tom Poole (instructed by W Davies) for the applicant.
Tiran Neressian (instructed by EMW Picton Howell LLP) for the respondent.
Neutral Cite:
[2011] EWHC 1476 (Ch)