Howells & Anor v Dominion Insurance Company Ltd

Howells & Anor v Dominion Insurance Company Ltd

The members of the unincorporated club were parties to the insurance contract through their agents and are personally liable for the judgment sum arising from that contract, but are not individually liable for costs in the absence of a specific order. The Master's decision conflated authority to contract with authority to litigate, which was an error of law. The judgment can be enforced against individual members subject to the court's discretion and any special circumstances particular to each member.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: David Roy Howells; Claimant/respondent: James Kelly; Defendant/appellant: The Dominion Insurance Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From Master's Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Representative Proceedings, Enforcement of Judgments, Liability of Unincorporated Associations, Costs in Representative Actions
Contract Law Civil Procedure Representative Proceedings Enforcement of Judgments Liability of Unincorporated Associations Costs in Representative Actions

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Roy Howells

Claimant/respondent

James Kelly

Claimant/respondent

The Dominion Insurance Company Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From Master's Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a judgment and costs order against an unincorporated association can be enforced against individual members
  2. 2 Whether individual members are personally liable for debts and costs arising from representative litigation

Ratio Decidendi

The members of the unincorporated club were parties to the insurance contract through their agents and are personally liable for the judgment sum arising from that contract, but are not individually liable for costs in the absence of a specific order. The Master's decision conflated authority to contract with authority to litigate, which was an error of law. The judgment can be enforced against individual members subject to the court's discretion and any special circumstances particular to each member.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Master's decision set aside regarding enforcement of judgment against individual members; matter remitted to Master to consider discretionary enforcement against individual members subject to special circumstances.
  • Appeal against Master's decision on costs dismissed.