Siebe Gorman & Co Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd
| Siebe Gorman & Co Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | High Court of Justice |
| Citation(s) | [1979] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 142 |
| Keywords | |
| Floating charge | |
Siebe Gorman & Co Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd [1979] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 142 is a UK insolvency law case, concerning the definition of a floating charge. It is outdated as authority, in light of the House of Lords decision in Re Spectrum Plus Ltd.
Facts
Siebe Gorman, a diving equipment company, granted a debenture in favour of Barclays (i.e. got a loan). The document said the loan was a ‘first fixed charge’ over all present and future book debts. It required Siebe Gorman to pay the proceeds of its book debts into a Barclays bank account, and forbid Siebe Gorman from putting other charges on, or assigning the book debts to anyone else. So there was a prohibition on dealing with the book debts before collection of them. Barclays also had the right to obtain absolute control by giving notice, but that right was never exercised.
Judgment
Slade J held that it was a fixed charge. The restrictions on Siebe Gorman’s power gave the bank enough control to be inconsistent with being a floating charge.