Jackson v Ayles & Ors

Jackson v Ayles & Ors

Mr Pumphrey's lending was carried on by way of business, making the Weymouth Loan a regulated activity under FSMA. As he was not authorised, the loan is unenforceable under section 26(1) FSMA. It is not just and equitable to allow enforcement because Mr Pumphrey cannot show a reasonable belief that he was not contravening the Act, and the balance of factors does not support relief.

Parties
Applicant (trustee in Bankruptcy of Stephen Anthony Ayles): Melissa Jackson; First Respondent: Stephen Anthony Ayles; Second Respondent: Cecilia Gay Ayles; Third Respondent: Trevor Jon Pumphrey; Fourth Respondent: Karen Lesley Pumphrey
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Declaration that the Weymouth Loan is unenforceable under section 26(1) FSMA; relief under section 28 FSMA refused.
Legal Topics
Enforceability of Loan Agreements, Regulated Mortgage Contracts, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, Just and Equitable Relief, Unlicensed Lending
Bankruptcy Financial Regulation Enforceability of Loan Agreements Regulated Mortgage Contracts Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 Just and Equitable Relief Unlicensed Lending

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Melissa Jackson

Applicant (trustee in Bankruptcy of Stephen Anthony Ayles)

Stephen Anthony Ayles

First Respondent

Cecilia Gay Ayles

Second Respondent

Trevor Jon Pumphrey

Third Respondent

Karen Lesley Pumphrey

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Application / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the making of the Weymouth Loan was an activity carried on by way of business under FSMA
  2. 2 Whether the Weymouth Loan is unenforceable under section 26(1) FSMA
  3. 3 Whether it is just and equitable to allow enforcement of the Weymouth Loan under section 28 FSMA

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Pumphrey's lending was carried on by way of business, making the Weymouth Loan a regulated activity under FSMA. As he was not authorised, the loan is unenforceable under section 26(1) FSMA. It is not just and equitable to allow enforcement because Mr Pumphrey cannot show a reasonable belief that he was not contravening the Act, and the balance of factors does not support relief.

Court Disposition

Declaration that the Weymouth Loan is unenforceable under section 26(1) FSMA; relief under section 28 FSMA refused.