Linotype-Hell Finance Ltd v Baker
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE STAUGHTON |
| Judgment Date | 22 September 1992 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1992] EWCA Civ J0922-7 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | 92/0870 |
| Date | 22 September 1992 |
[1992] EWCA Civ J0922-7
Lord Justice Staughton
92/0870
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE FALLON Q.C.)
Royal Courts of Justice
MR. MARTIN STRUTT (instructed by Messrs. Bosworths, East Molesey, Surrey) appeared for the Appellant (Defendant).
MR. GEORGE NEWSOM (instructed by Messrs. Willans, Cheltenham, Gloucester) appeared for the Respondents (Plaintiffs).
On 16th January 1989, or alternatively on 1st March 1989, Lease Management Services Limited agreed to hire some Linotype equipment to Waterfront Studios Limited. The interest of Lease Management has been assigned to Linotype-Hell Finance Limited.
It is said that the defendant, David Garland Baker, signed an authority to execute a guarantee of the obligations of Waterfront Studios under that agreement, and a guarantee was executed in purported pursuance of that authority. Then Waterfront Studios went into liquidation with a considerable deficiency. So Linotype-Hell Finance Limited sued Mr. Baker under the guarantee. They claimed some £61,000 for unpaid rentals until the end of the agreement, which was due to last five years, with a very modest discount of 5 per cent for advance payments. They also claimed delivery up of the goods, which it seems are in the possession of Mr. Baker.
The defence was that Mr. Baker had never signed the authority to execute a guarantee. Furthermore, there was a point that it referred to a lease of 16th January 1989 and not to one of 1st March 1989. There was also said to be a counterclaim; and it is said that to award the plaintiffs £61,000 together with delivery up of the goods contains an element of double recovery, because they would receive rental for the whole period of the agreement but would have the goods returned to them forthwith. Mr. Newsom has an answer to that. He points to clause 10(3) of the lease agreement which says that when the goods are returned they must be sold and credit given for the proceeds of sale.
In Order 14 proceedings the district judge gave unconditional leave to defend. There was an appeal and His Honour Judge Fallon Q.C. gave judgment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
DYC Fishing Ltd v Perla del Caribe Inc.
...The principles relevant on the grant of a stay of execution of a judgment are well known. The traditional test, as stated in Linotype-Hell Finance Limited v Baker [1992] 4 All ER 887 which required that the applicant show that he had some prospect of success and that without a stay he would......
-
Singh Rahul, Commonwealth Communications LLC and Ocean Petroleum Inc. v Kingston Telecom Ltd and Cable & Wireless JA Ltd
...question of a grant of a stay of execution, ought to be guided by the principles pronounced by Staughton, L. J. in the case of Linotype-Hell Finance Ltd. v Baker [1992] 4 ALL E.R. 887. The test as propounded by Staughton LJ. was couched in the following terms when, at page 888, he said: "I......
-
[1] Carosello Establishment (Appeal dismissed by the Full Court of Appeal on the 31 October 2007) [2] David Alan Pollock [3] Kelly Iverson Pollock Appellants/Applicants v [1] Caribbean Ventures International Ltd ((in Liquidation)) [2] Marcus A. Wide, Liquidator of Caribbean Ventures International Ltd Respondents [ECSC]
...been disclosed which should serve to prevent the ordinary rule not to grant a stay from applying. Linotype-Hell Finance Ltd. v Baker [1993] 1 WLR 321 , Turkey v Awadh [2004] EWCA Civ 1471 and Winchester Cigarette Machinery Ltd. v Michael John Payne and another (unreported) (QBD), No. FC3 9......
-
Watersports Enterprises Ltd v Jamaica Grande Ltd, Grand Resort Ltd and Urban Development Corporation
...prospect of success. 8 The present approach to applications for a stay pending the hearing of an appeal has been highlighted in Linotype-Hell Finance Ltd v Baker [1992] 4 All ER 887 the headnote of which reads as follows: 'Where an unsuccessful defendant seeks a stay of execution pending a......