The proceedings raised the question of whether the registration had not been paid to the credit reference agencies as an omission of a debtor (or tenant) to credit agencies concluded under a regulated but not applicable credit contract. The Court of Appeal allowed the applicants to appeal against the judge`s finding that they had not proven a cause and effect, in particular finding that it was not fair to characterize the first applicant as a beneficiary as a delay in his lease-sale, after a competent court found that he was irretrievably unenforceable against him. The question was whether a lender could properly register a default with a credit reference agency when a borrower is unable to pay under a so-called “unenforceable” credit contract. “Irrevocably unenforceable” credit contracts (a phrase referred to by Lord Hoffman in dimond/Lovell  2 All ER 897) are agreements, for which the court is prohibited from issuing an enforcement warrant under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, S 127 (3) and 127(4) (CCA 1974) because of specific breaches of the requirements for the proper performance of regulated credit contracts. Although these subsections were removed under agreements reached on or after April 6, 2007, there are still many credit contracts for which they apply, and the lease of a laptop signed by Mr. Grace was one of them. Can a borrower be a debtor if a credit contract is not applicable? Can a lender correctly register a default with a credit reference agency when a borrower is unable to pay under a so-called “unenforceable” credit contract? William Hibbert, a lawyer with Henderson Chambers, reviewed the decision of the Court of Appeal in Grace and another v Black Horse Ltd. Free court proceedings are only available to people based in the UK How important is the Court of Appeal`s decision? The case was a claim for damages from Mr. Grace for Grace and another v Black Horse Limited  EWCA Civ 1413,  All ER (D) 05 (Nov) Access to this article and thousands of others love it for free by subscribe to our blog.