IP Briefing: Appealing Refusal of a Recall of Sequestration
In C & M Wealth Global Limited v Gwen Gall [2026] SAC (Civ) 11, the Sheriff Appeal Court clarified that an appeal against a sheriff’s decision to refuse a petition for recall of sequestration is competent but can only proceed with leave of the sheriff. Leave will likely only be provided in exceptional circumstances.
Background
Gwen Gall was sequestrated on 4 October 2022. She lodged a petition for recall of the sequestration. This was refused on 29 October 2025. An appeal against this decision was lodged on 26 November 2025. Rule 10.1 of the Acts of Sederunt (Sheriff Court Bankruptcy Rules) 2016 outlines four appealable categories of decision. Refusal to recall is not included as an appealable category.
The procedural appeal sheriff asked parties for submissions on the following question:-
“Can the sheriff’s interlocutor of 19 (sic) October 2025 be competently appealed to the Sheriff Appeal Court standing the terms of:
- section 27(9) of the Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 2016; and
- rule 10.1(1) of the Act of Sederunt (Sheriff Court Bankruptcy Rules) 2016
The Appellant, a party litigant, argued that the sheriff’s refusal was a final decision and as such was an appealable final judgement. She also noted that an appeal against final refusal of a recall was not explicitly excluded by the relevant legislation.
The Respondent argued that the position was not clear. They could not identify any case where an s.30 decision had been subject to appeal. The AiB took a neutral position.
Decision
The court referred to S.110 of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014. This section contains provisions for appeals from a sheriff to the Sheriff Appeal Court. The court held that a decision of a sheriff to refuse to recall an award of sequestration clearly did not constitute a final judgement. The Court further referred to case law clarifying it was not a final judgement as the sequestration continued after the refusal to recall, meaning the subject matter of the cause continued.
As the decision was not a final judgement, the decision could only be competently appealed with leave of the sheriff. The Appellant in this case did not obtain leave, and as such their appeal was not competent.
The Court then discussed the principles a sheriff should consider when determining whether to refuse or grant leave to appeal. The decision to refuse or grant recall was a fact based decision. As such the court advised leave to appeal should be rarely granted. The decision for a sheriff to award or refuse recall was discretionary and an appeal court would only interfere with the exercise of that discretion when the sheriff at the first instance had taken account of an irrelevant matter, failed to take account of a relevant matter or something otherwise had clearly gone wrong.
Comment
This is useful clarification for Insolvency Practitioners of a previously debated area of law. When acting in sequestrations it is useful to know that an appeal against refusal to award a recall may be competent if leave is granted. The knowledge that leave should only be granted in exceptional circumstances will assist in strategy planning.
BBM Solicitors specialise in advising IP’s in both contentious and non-contentious matters (including transactional work). Contact: Eric Baijal (emb@bbmsolicitors.co.uk).This briefing note is current as at 10 March 2026 and is our understanding of the position described at that date. Legal advice ought to be taken before relying on its terms (particularly to ensure the law has not changed).