Society of Lloyd's v Levy
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE PETER GIBSON,Lord Justice Longmore,LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE |
| Judgment Date | 21 January 2005 |
| Neutral Citation | [2005] EWCA Civ 25 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | A3/2004/1767 |
| Date | 21 January 2005 |
[2005] EWCA Civ 25
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
COMMERCIAL COURT
(MR JUSTICE MORISON)
Lord Justice Peter Gibson
Lord Justice Longmore
A3/2004/1767
PROFESSOR MARK WATSON-GANDY (instructed by Messrs James Barnett, Hungerford RG17 0JG) appeared on behalf of the Applicants
The Respondent did not appear and was not represented
I will ask Lord Justice Longmore to give the first judgment.
This is a case where the Society of Lloyd's has found it necessary to take proceedings against Mr and Mrs Levy for the premium which was due to Equitas after the reconstruction which has now concerned these courts for so many years. The Society issued a writ for the premium on 24th March 1997. As far as Mr and Mrs Levy were concerned, that was stymied by the fact that they filed for bankruptcy in the United States. In due course that bankruptcy application was dismissed and so the proceedings could continue against them.
On 5th January 2000 they were joined to the Jaffray action, since they continued to refuse to pay. The intention of the Jaffray action was that it should resolve all outstanding matters as between Lloyd's and those who owed the Equitas premium. Numerous allegations were made. The action took a long time to try. Meanwhile, the Society agreed that they would not seek to enforce any claims for premium against Mr and Mrs Levy pending the resolution of the issues in that action. As I say, there was a lengthy trial before Cresswell J. There was then a lengthy hearing in the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal gave judgment on 26th July 2002 and on 28th October 2002 the House of Lords refused permission to appeal.
After that, Mr and Mrs Levy, together with others, sought to amend their pleadings in the Jaffray action to allege negligent misrepresentation by Lloyd's, despite the fact that the litigation was at an end, and they served a defence to the claim for premium relying on the same claim for negligent misrepresentation.
On 17th April 2003 Cooke J refused permission to Mr and Mrs Levy, and the others who were parties to the application to amend the pleadings in the Jaffray action, to plead negligent misrepresentation. That application came to be known as the Laws application. After Cooke J had made his decision, there was then no defence to the claim for premium.
Nevertheless, an application was made to the Court of Appeal in the Laws case. But before judgment was given by the Court of Appeal on the Laws application on 19th December 2003, Mr and Mrs...
To continue reading
Request your trial