Brake and another (Respondents) v Chedington Court Estate Ltd (Appellant)
Case ID: 2021/0010
Does a bankrupt have standing under section 303(1) of the Insolvency Act 1986 to challenge transactions entered by their trustee in bankruptcy in situations where the relief sought would have no impact on their position within the bankruptcy?
The Brakes were made bankrupt in 2015. Their trustee in bankruptcy entered into a number of transactions to dispose of the bankrupt estate. The Brakes sought to challenge the propriety of these transactions under section 303(1) Insolvency Act 1986, which provides for the trustee’s exercise of discretion to be challenged on the application of “dissatisfied” persons. At the Court of Appeal, it was found that the Brakes had sufficient standing to make an application under section 303(1) as bankrupts in their own capacity on the basis that they had a direct interest in the relief sought.
The Chedington Court Estate Ltd now appeals to the Supreme Court on the ground that bankrupts cannot have standing to interfere in the conduct of their bankruptcies where the relief sought would have no impact on their position within the bankruptcy and/or where other relief is available to them in the general law.
Chedington Court Estate Ltd
(1) Nihal Mohammed Kamal Brake
(2) Andrew Young Brake
Lord Briggs, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt, Lady Rose, Lord Richards
Hearing start date
1 November 2022
Hearing finish date
1 November 2022
|1 November 2022||Morning session||Afternoon session|
10 August 2023
 UKSC 29
- Judgment (PDF)
- Press summary (HTML version)
- Judgment on The National Archives (HTML version)
- Judgment on BAILII (HTML version)
A formal hand-down took place on 1 November 2023.
|Watch Judgment summary|
|1 November 2023||Judgment summary|