Lees v Lloyds Bank Plc

Lees v Lloyds Bank Plc

The claim was dismissed as totally without merit because Lloyds Bank PLC remained the registered proprietor of the legal charges and thus had standing to bring possession proceedings. The evidence did not establish any assignment of the mortgages. Lloyds had adequately responded to all DSARs, and the claim was an improper collateral attack on final County Court orders. No basis existed for further disclosure or relief.

Parties
Claimant: Silas Jonathan Lees; Defendant: Lloyds Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Property/trusts/data Protection / Disposal Hearing and Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Claim dismissed as totally without merit
Legal Topics
Securitisation of Mortgages, Standing to Bring Possession Proceedings, Data Subject Access Requests (dsars), Abuse of Process, Disclosure Obligations, Collateral Attack on Judgments
Property Law Data Protection Civil Procedure Securitisation of Mortgages Standing to Bring Possession Proceedings Data Subject Access Requests (dsars) Abuse of Process Disclosure Obligations +1 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Silas Jonathan Lees

Claimant

Lloyds Bank PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Property/trusts/data Protection / Disposal Hearing and Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Lloyds Bank PLC assigned its interest in the mortgages and thus lacked standing to bring possession proceedings
  2. 2 Whether Lloyds Bank PLC failed to comply with Data Subject Access Requests under the Data Protection Act 1998/2018 and GDPR
  3. 3 Whether the High Court should grant disclosure or other relief sought by the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was dismissed as totally without merit because Lloyds Bank PLC remained the registered proprietor of the legal charges and thus had standing to bring possession proceedings. The evidence did not establish any assignment of the mortgages. Lloyds had adequately responded to all DSARs, and the claim was an improper collateral attack on final County Court orders. No basis existed for further disclosure or relief.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed as totally without merit

Orders

  • Each party to file and serve written submissions within 14 days regarding consequential orders, costs, and any application for permission to appeal; counter-submissions within 7 days thereafter; any application for permission to appeal adjourned pending determination after written submissions.