Stamp duty land tax Return. The Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber), in dismissing the appeal by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners against an earlier decision by the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber), held, inter alia, that a sub-sale of a head leasehold interest by a company to a partnership (of which the company owned 98%) was subject to stamp duty land tax liability of nil.
Insolvency Petition. The Chancery Division held that the fees of the applicant solicitors had not qualified, nor were they to have been 'treated' as qualifying, as an expense of the administration of the relevant company under r2.67 of the Insolvency Rules 1986, and the court did not have power under s51 of the to make an order which would have directly or indirectly produced that result. However, its fees were expenses in the liquidation of the company in accordance with r4.218(3)(h) of the 1986 Rules.
Contract Construction. Administrators of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) sought the court's directions as to the interpretation, characterisation, validity and effect of security provisions in two agreements. The principal issues were whether security interests created under the agreements had constituted a floating charge and, if so, the implications of that fact. The Companies Court found that the security interest was properly characterised as a floating charge.
Solicitor Disciplinary proceedings. The Divisional Court dismissed the appellant solicitor's appeal against the respondent Solicitors Regulation Authority's solicitors disciplinary tribunal's decision to indefinitely suspend him, as the findings of fact made by the tribunal had been amply justified on the material before it. However, as he had not been put on notice that he was at risk of a costs order before such an order was made against him, the issue of costs would be remitted.
Company Administration order. The proceedings concerned the administration of a bank that was insolvent. A Global Master Repurchase Agreement (GMRA) had been made regarding the bank. The issue arose as to whether the appointment of the administrators constituted an immediate and complete event of default under the GMRA, without the need of a service of notice declaring it an event of default. The Companies Court of the Chancery Division held that the appointment of liquidators did not constitute an event of default under the GMRA.
Harbour Harbour authority. The Queen's Bench Division held that the claimant's application for judicial review of the defendant's refusal to grant a Harbour Revision Order seeking to transfer ownership of part of Port of Immingham to the claimant would be refused on the basis that the defendant had no power to make the revision order sought.
Income tax Emoluments. The First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) held that an employees remuneration trust created for the benefit of the executives of the Murray Group and the footballers of Rangers Football Club which was owned by the Murray Group, were valid and subsisting and that sums advanced to the employees of the group, by way of loans had been made in pursuance of discretionary powers and remained recoverable and represented debts on their estates. Accordingly, the appeal against the disputed assessments would be allowed.
Contracts Formation. The Chancery Division held that the claimant company had failed to establish a cause of action against the second defendant for breach of a joint venture agreement in respect of two property developments. However, the court held, in respect of the first defendant company which had failed to follow through with the development of a site (the property), that a Pallant v Morgan trust arose and, accordingly, the court awarded the claimant 40% of the agreed actual net profit made by the first defendant on the re-sale of the property. Where property had been acquired for the joint benefit of A and B, there was no requirement, in respect of a Pallant v Morgan trust, that there had to be agreement or understanding that B would acquire a specific proprietorial interest.
Trading Trading standards. The appellant motor retailer company and its managing director had been convicted of a number of trading standards offences. The appellants had appealed against the convictions. The Divisional Court in dismissing the majority of the appeals held, amongst other things, that there had been sufficient evidence for the judge in the first instance to have drawn inferences of guilt.
Company Winding up. The claimant sought to lodge proofs of debt with respect to contractual reinstatement and repair liabilities against a company to which it had leased premises. The company's liquidators rejected the proofs. The Chancery Division held that the company had the full term of the lease to reinstate the premises and that the calculation of the repair liability had not been in accordance with statutory requirements.