Lenders rejoice as the rule against double proof prohibits operation of the rule in Cherry v Boultbee (Supreme Court) | Practical Law

Lenders rejoice as the rule against double proof prohibits operation of the rule in Cherry v Boultbee (Supreme Court) | Practical Law

In Re Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander [2011] UKSC 48, the Supreme Court considered the combined effect of the rule against double proof and the rule in Cherry v Boultbee (1839) 4 My & Cr 442, and whether the Court of Appeal decision in Re SSSL Realisations (2002) Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 7 was correct. The court's decision will reduce a lender's need to rely on non-competition clauses in guarantees.

Lenders rejoice as the rule against double proof prohibits operation of the rule in Cherry v Boultbee (Supreme Court)

by PLC Restructuring and Insolvency and PLC Finance
Published on 26 Oct 2011 • England, Wales
In Re Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander [2011] UKSC 48, the Supreme Court considered the combined effect of the rule against double proof and the rule in Cherry v Boultbee (1839) 4 My & Cr 442, and whether the Court of Appeal decision in Re SSSL Realisations (2002) Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 7 was correct. The court's decision will reduce a lender's need to rely on non-competition clauses in guarantees.