82,891
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
This is a self-help remedy available to a debtor whose cross-claim arises from the same transaction (or a closely related transaction) as the original debt. Under this device a debtor simply deducts its claim from the debt it owes and tenders any balance to the creditor. The sums in question must be due or, if representing unliquidated damages, a [[good faith]] and reasonable assessment of the loss. (Contrast with set off at law, which requires the claims to be determined by judgment of the courts). | This is a self-help remedy available to a debtor whose cross-claim arises from the same transaction (or a closely related transaction) as the original debt. Under this device a debtor simply deducts its claim from the debt it owes and tenders any balance to the creditor. The sums in question must be due or, if representing unliquidated damages, a [[good faith]] and reasonable assessment of the loss. (Contrast with set off at law, which requires the claims to be determined by judgment of the courts). | ||
In {{casenote|Geldof Metaalconstructie|Carves}} [2010] EWCA Civ 667 the leading judgment confirmed the equitable test as being | In {{casenote|Geldof Metaalconstructie|Carves}} [2010] EWCA Civ 667 the leading judgment confirmed the equitable test as being “whether the cross-claim is ... so closely connected with the claimant’s demand that it would be manifestly unjust to allow it to enforce payment without taking into account the cross-claim.” | ||
====[[Banker’s set-off]] (a.k.a ''[[combination of accounts]]''==== | ====[[Banker’s set-off]] (a.k.a ''[[combination of accounts]]''==== |