A brother and sister have been granted an order freezing their brother’s assets following their successful claim that he was guilty of fraud, forgery and lying.
Gerard and Elizabeth Robinson won the High Court dispute with their brother, Robert, who, midway through the hearing, dropped his own claim alleging lies and conspiracy on their part. He has since disappeared.
Giving judgment, Richards J said that Robert had launched his case against Gerard and Elizabeth on Monday 6 October. However, the following morning, when he was due to give oral evidence, his solicitor issued a notice of discontinuance on his behalf, and told the judge that Robert had left court that morning and had not been seen since.
The judge said that, in those circumstances, Robert had failed to rebut the allegations made against him in relation to mortgages on three Northamptonshire properties, including the family home at Corby, and had failed to support his own allegations against Gerard and Elizabeth.
Richards J therefore found in favour of Gerard and Elizabeth in respect of claims totalling more than £85,000 plus interest, and made a £60,000 order against Robert for their legal costs. He also made a freezing order over Robert’s assets up to the value of £100,000.
The case centred on the mortgage arrangements for three properties: the family home in Nelson Road, Corby, owned by the parties’ parents, Honey Pot Cottage in Little Oakley, Kettering, and 147 Rowlett Road, Corby.
Elizabeth alleged that, following an earlier mortgage of the family home which had been agreed between them, Robert arranged a further £16,000 advance secured against the house without her consent, and by tricking her into signing the relevant papers.
Gerard claimed that Robert had purchased the other two properties in his, Gerard’s, name and had forged his signature on the documents.
The judge said that Elizabeth and Gerard had become liable under the mortgages, and had left it too late to deny that liability.
Richards J ruled that Elizabeth was entitled to £70,234 to cover the mortgage payments she had been obliged to make in respect of the family home, and that Gerard and Elizabeth were entitled to £16,617 from the sale of the other two properties. He also ordered the removal of a caution Robert had registered over Honey Pot Cottage.
Robinson v Robinson and another Chancery Division (David Richards J) 15 October 2003.
Peter Kirby (instructed by John Healy & Co) appeared for the claimant; Gordon Bennett (instructed instructed by Davenport Lyons) appeared for defendants.
