CFL Finance Ltd v Laser Trust & Anor

CFL Finance Ltd v Laser Trust & Anor

A settlement agreement scheduled to a Tomlin order may be subject to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 if it provides for the deferment of an undisputed debt for consideration, thereby constituting the provision of credit. In this case, there is a genuine triable issue as to whether the Settlement Agreement provided Mr Gertner with credit, making it potentially unenforceable for non-compliance with the CCA.

Parties
Appellant (cross Respondent): CFL Finance Limited; Respondent (cross Appellant): Laser Trust; Respondent: Moises Gertner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Cross Appeal
Outcome
Cross-appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Consumer Credit Act Applicability, Settlement Agreements, Tomlin Orders, Provision of Credit, Enforceability of Agreements, Bankruptcy Petitions
Contract Law Consumer Protection Bankruptcy Law Consumer Credit Act Applicability Settlement Agreements Tomlin Orders Provision of Credit Enforceability of Agreements +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CFL Finance Limited

Appellant (cross Respondent)

Laser Trust

Respondent (cross Appellant)

Moises Gertner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Consumer Credit Act 1974 apply to a settlement agreement scheduled to a Tomlin order?
  2. 2 Did the Settlement Agreement provide Mr Gertner with 'credit' within the meaning of the CCA?

Ratio Decidendi

A settlement agreement scheduled to a Tomlin order may be subject to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 if it provides for the deferment of an undisputed debt for consideration, thereby constituting the provision of credit. In this case, there is a genuine triable issue as to whether the Settlement Agreement provided Mr Gertner with credit, making it potentially unenforceable for non-compliance with the CCA.

Court Disposition

Cross-appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of Marcus Smith J’s order amended to allow Mr Gertner’s appeal from Judge Briggs on the basis of ground 5 as well as grounds 1, 2, and 3.