The Society of Lloyd's v Elizabeth Mary Levy & Ors

The Society of Lloyd's v Elizabeth Mary Levy & Ors

The amendments sought by the defendants are refused because the European Directive does not confer directly enforceable rights on the defendants, Lloyd’s is not an emanation or agent of the State, the stamp duty and registration points are unarguable, and there is no evidence of manifest error in the quantum. There is no arguable defence to Lloyd’s claims and summary judgment is granted.

Parties
Claimant: The Society of Lloyd’s; Defendant: Elizabeth Mary Levy; Defendant: Mark Ian Levy; Defendant: Jeffrey Harcourt Johnson; Defendant: Susan Rachel Johnson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial) / Summary Judgment Applications and Applications to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
Summary judgment for the claimant; permission to amend pleadings refused; applications for disclosure and ECJ reference refused.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Debt, Stamp Duty on Assignments, Registration of Charges, Direct Effect of EU Directives, Summary Judgment, Disclosure, Res Judicata, Limitation of Actions
Commercial Law Insurance Law Civil Procedure European Union Law Assignment of Debt Stamp Duty on Assignments Registration of Charges Direct Effect of EU Directives +4 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Society of Lloyd’s

Claimant

Elizabeth Mary Levy

Defendant

Mark Ian Levy

Defendant

Jeffrey Harcourt Johnson

Defendant

Susan Rachel Johnson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial) / Summary Judgment Applications and Applications to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants may amend their pleadings to raise points on the European Directive, stamp duty, registration of charges, and quantum
  2. 2 Whether the European Directive 73/239 confers directly enforceable rights on the defendants
  3. 3 Whether the assignment of debt to Lloyd’s is inadmissible for want of stamp duty

Ratio Decidendi

The amendments sought by the defendants are refused because the European Directive does not confer directly enforceable rights on the defendants, Lloyd’s is not an emanation or agent of the State, the stamp duty and registration points are unarguable, and there is no evidence of manifest error in the quantum. There is no arguable defence to Lloyd’s claims and summary judgment is granted.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for the claimant; permission to amend pleadings refused; applications for disclosure and ECJ reference refused.

Orders

  • Judgment for Lloyd’s on their claims against the defendants.
  • Permission to amend pleadings refused.