Re Panama, New Zealand, and Australian Royal Mail Co explained

Re Panama, New Zealand, and Australian Royal Mail Co
Court:Court of Appeal
Date Decided:14 February 1870
Full Name:In re Panama, New Zealand, and Australian Royal Mail Company, Limited
Citations:(1870) 5 Ch App 318
Judges:Sir G.M. Giffard LJ

Re Panama, New Zealand, and Australian Royal Mail Co (1870) 5 Ch App 318 is generally accepted as the first decision under English law to recognise a floating charge.[1] [2]

The reported decision is extremely short, and the judgment itself is only two pages. The word "floating charge" does not appear in it.[3]

Decision

The case related to an appeal by a debenture holder against an order of Malins VC. The appeal came before Sir G.M. Giffard LJ. The issue centred upon the company's ability to assign all of its "undertaking" to a mortgagee, and whether undertaking included the proceeds of sale of vessels belonging to the company.

The appellants relied upon the decision of the House of Lords in Holroyd v Marshall (1862) 10 HLC 191 that a mortgage requires that mortgagee must have the power to prevent the mortgagee from removing the property. Here not only could the ships be sailed out of the jurisdiction, the company could also "deal with them as they pleased", including ultimately selling them.

Giffard LJ held:

The court was clearly at pains to limit its ruling to the individual case. In addition to stressing "in this particular case, and having regard to the state of this particular company", his Lordship went on to say "I do not refer to such things as sale or mortgages of property". However, that notwithstanding, the case continued to be applied and the role of floating charges, having been implicitly recognised expressly enforced, continued to develop and to grow.

Precedent

Although the case is cited as the genesis of the floating charge in English law, that phrase is not used in the judgment. In Re Colonial Trusts Corporation (1879) 15 Ch D 465 Sir George Jessel MR first referred to security as being "floating security",[4] and this phrase was contrasted with a fixed charge, until it came to eventually be known as a floating charge.

Notes and References

  1. Book: Securities over Personalty. Michael Gillooly. The Federation Press. 1994. 978-1862871298. 3. A number of commentators regard the 1870 decision of In re Panama, New Zealand, and Australia Royal Mail Company as being the first case where this result was identified by the courts..
  2. Book: Towards Reforming the Legal Framework for Secured Transactions in Nigeria. Chima Williams Iheme. Springer. 9783319418353. 2016. 55.
  3. Web site: Key Insolvency Dates: 1870 - floating charge introduction. Bankruptcy, Insolvency & Corporate Rescue. 17 February 2011. 6 May 2017.
  4. (1879) 15 Ch D 465 at 468, 469 and 472.