Cs sought interest that is statutory the contractual price charged by D (29% every month); the Judge rejected CsвЂ™ first rationale (that this is the price C had to spend to borrow cash) and stated this process should really be limited to commercial instances.
224: CsвЂ™ second argument had been that Cs could have utilized the surplus funds to settle other HCST loans вЂ“ there could be more merit compared to that argument, however it will be better explored in the facts of the specific situation.
Complete judgment text available right right here: Kerrigan v Elevate
Overview by Ruth Bala, counsel when it comes to creditor.
- Latest News
- 19 December DecemberвЂ™s PLC Column: Amended Default Notice Needs
- 01 December NovemberвЂ™s PLC Column: FCA Payment Deferrals Guidance
- 24 November New article on вЂњloot containersвЂќ and customer legislation
- See all news >