Bank of Scotland Plc v Waugh & Ors
2014
CHANCERY DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
- His Honour Judge Behrens sitting as a Judge of the High Court in Leeds
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
- Equity and Trusts
2014
CHANCERY DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a long-standing dispute between the Bank of Scotland plc and the Waugh family regarding loans and a questionable charge over Asquorn House. The primary issues were the validity of the charge and liability for the sums due. The court concluded that the charge was not valid as a deed but still effective as an equitable mortgage. The Trustees were not estopped from denying its validity due to execution defects. The Bank was granted summary judgment for the sums claimed under the facility letter.
Judge Behrens :
Abbreviations
In this judgment I shall adopt the following abbreviations:
Bank of Scotland plc The Bank HM Land Registry The Registry John Thomas Waugh Mr Waugh Kathleen Waugh Mrs Waugh Sintons Law and/or Sinton & Co Sintons The Nelson Trust The Trust Timothy Rohan Gray Mr Gray Iain Ernest Williams Mr Williams Trustees of the Nelson Trust The Trustees Asquorn House 20 – 22 Borough Road, North Shields Asquorn House The Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 The 1989 Act The Charge dated 8 th August 2003 of Asquorn House The Charge
Introduction
These proceedings form part of a long running dispute between the Bank and Mr Waugh and other members of his family. The Bank has provided banking facilities to the Trust since 2002. It has provided loans to the Trust pursuant to various facility letters and taken a number of securities.
This action is concerned with the charge granted over Asquorn House in August 2003 and the monies due under a facility letter dated 18 July 2007. There is also a claim against Mr Williams under a limited guarantee but it forms no part of this application.
Asquorn House
It will be necessary to set out the facts surrounding the grant of the charge in a little detail later in this judgment. It is however clear that the charge was duly signed by the Trustees and registered in October 2003 under title TY202264.
Although the charge was duly signed by the Trustees it is plain on the face of the charge that the Trustees’ signature was not attested. Accordingly there was no compliance with section 1(3) of the 1989 Act . There is a further error in the charge in that it ascribes to the Trust a registered office at Nelson House Stroud. In fact the Trust is not a registered corporation and the Trustees are individuals.
As a result of these errors the Trustees have made an application to the Registry for cancellation of the charge/rectification of the register. That application is stayed pending the outcome of these proceedings.
In these proceedings the Bank seeks a declaration that the Trustees and/or the Trust are estopped from denying the validity of the charge. As a fall back it seeks a declaration that the charge is effective as an equitable mortgage and/or that it is entitled to perfect the charge pursuant to its standard terms and conditions.
In this application the Bank seeks summary judgment of its claims in relation to Asquorn House. On 11 th June 2014 Mr Waugh presented an application to the Cour