header-logo header-logo

31 October 2019 / Caroline Shea KC , Gavin Bennison
Issue: 7862 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

The (messy) law of receivership

Caroline Shea QC & Gavin Bennison help unravel the complex triage that is receivers, agency & possession
  • The position pre-Menon: the facts.
  • The decision in Menon.
  • Reflection and practical implications.

The law of receivership can be fiendishly difficult to make sense of. That is not just an academic issue: the ‘messiness’ of receivership creates daily challenges for lawyers acting for and against receivers in the courts. Often, cases that ought to be routine and straightforward become bogged down in legal argument.

Thankfully, on 7 October 2019 Mr Justice Mann made things a lot easier for practitioners by resolving one of the biggest issues in the law of receivership: can a receiver who is appointed under a mortgage of property owned by an individual mortgagor claim possession of the property from that individual by suing in his or her own name as receiver? The case was Menon & Menon v Pask & Goode [2019] EWHC 2611 (Ch), [2019] All ER (D)

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll