Interim relief specialist, litigator Matt Champ, has been successful in the Chancery Division of the High Court’s Applications Court (“the Court”) in relation to obtaining an emergency order for sale and an order allowing Matt’s client to sell the property without the input or signature of Matt’s client’s ex-partner.

This was needed when the ex-partner refused to give authority for the former family home to be sold a week before completion was due to take place despite having already signed the required documentation relating to the sale.

Matt, who had been acting in the underlying dispute relating to the contested sale of the former family home, was informed at 15:45 on Friday 12 February 2021 that the difficult ex-partner was refusing to give authority for contracts to be exchanged and the sale completed despite providing the endorsed documents required. The sale was due to complete a mere seven days later. This was potentially disastrous for Matt’s client as she could not afford the mortgage, it had taken two years to obtain a buyer and there was the risk of the chain collapsing.

The case was made even more complicated because the ex-partner had been made bankrupt and so the question was whether the ex-partner’s trustee in bankruptcy had authority to dispose of the legal interest in the property (which was co-owned) in addition to the beneficial interest which vested with the Trustee and whether, as a result, the conveyancers needed the defendant’s authority in any event.

Showing why Matt is one of Kent’s go-to lawyers for urgent relief, Matt drafted the lengthy proceedings, instructed counsel, prepared the bundle and arranged for the hearing to be heard before Mann J on 16 February 2021.

Matt instructed Francis Ng, of Selborne Chambers to address the Court on his clients’ behalf.

Mann J gave judgment which said, to paraphrase:

In relation to the merits of the claim, they are absolutely plain. The defendant is not living at the property and is almost certainly not going to be in the future. He has no reason to contest the sale of the property bearing in mind that he has, on two occasions, signed the relevant paperwork to allow the sale to proceed. He is only obstructing the sale without a good reason.

His trustees in bankruptcy have agreed to the property being sold and the defendant should not obstruct the sale for no reason. If he is unhappy with that agreement being reached he should bring a challenge within his bankruptcy which he is entitled to do if he so wishes. All those that have an interest in the property do not oppose this application, the defendant has no basis to oppose it and no standing to oppose it. As a result, I will order the relief sought subject to fine-tuning the order.

Matt’s clients also obtain a significant costs order in their favour.

Matt says:

A relationship ending is always unpleasant but parties have to take a step back and think about the consequences that are involved when being difficult for no other obvious reason than to get one over on the ex.

However, being difficult for the sake of it is never going to end well and we are happy to utilise the procedures for obtaining urgent relief if it is in our clients’ interests to do so.