![cover image](https://wikiwandv2-19431.kxcdn.com/_next/image?url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/VictorVPhonograph.jpg/640px-VictorVPhonograph.jpg&w=640&q=50)
Re Yagerphone Ltd
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Re Yagerphone Ltd [1935] 1 Ch 392 was a United Kingdom insolvency law decision relating to unfair preferences and the proceeds of any claims by a liquidator for unfair preferences, and in particular determining the priority of claims between the general body of creditors and the holder of a floating charge.[1][2]
Re Yagerphone Ltd | |
---|---|
![]() A yagerphone was a type of portable phonograph | |
Court | High Court |
Citation | [1935] 1 Ch 392 |
Court membership | |
Judge sitting | Bennett J |
Keywords | |
Unfair preference, after-acquired property |
The case held that because the power to challenge a transaction as an unfair preference was a statutory right vested in the liquidator alone, the proceeds of any action were not "property of the company" and as such they were not caught be a floating charge which was expressed to include after acquired property (distinguishing Re Anglo-Austrian Printing & Publishing Union [1895] 2 Ch 891). Bennett J held that the proceeds were impressed by a statutory trust for the general body of creditors.[3]