Re Debtor (No 32/SD/1991) (No 2)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1994 |
| Year | 1994 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
7 cases
-
Truex v Toll
...determined, was a bill for a sum unquantified and thus unliquidated: see e.g. In Re Laceward Ltd [1981] 1 WLR 133 at 137, Re a Debtor No 32 of 1991 (no 2) [1994] BCC 524 at 527. Indeed in the latter case Vinelott J held that it was an abuse of process for a firm of accountants to serve a st......
-
Scottish & Newcastle Ltd v Raguz
...for the application of the section are satisfied. The rationale was explained by Vinelott J in In re a Debtor No 32 of 1991 (No 2) [1994] BCC 524 at 528, where he said, “The court's power of review under s. 375(1) is an exceptional power, not to be found in any other jurisdiction. The reaso......
-
Noel F Moore and Martin F Grimley(Practising as Moore Grimley Chartered Accountants) v Rodney Williamson (Trading as Commercial Vehicle Sales, Williamson Properties, R W Farm and Normandy Inn
...could be arithmetically computed. [10] In another first instance decision more directly in point, Re A Debtor No. 32 of 1991 (No. 2) [1994] BCC 524, the petitioning creditor was, as in the present case, a 6 firm of accountants. These decisions were reviewed in the course of his judgment, Vi......
-
Dominic James Purvis v H M Customs and Excise
...referred me to dicta of Millett J in Re aDebtor (No 32-SD 1991) 1 WLR 314 and the decision of Vinelott J in Re aDebtor (32-SD/1991) (No 2) 1994 BCC 524 as indicating that the discretion to review under Section 375(1) was a jurisdiction to be exercised in only the most exceptional circumstan......
Request a trial to view additional results