Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited v Taylor-Wright

Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited v Taylor-Wright

Summary judgment was appropriate because the defendant's admission of borrowing and the supporting documents (commitment letter, Note 2, mortgages) established the bank's entitlement to relief, regardless of the forgery allegation, and no alternative defence raised a triable issue.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited; Respondent: Marvalyn Taylor-Wright
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Loan Agreements, Mortgage Security, Forgery, Limitation Period, Ex Turpi Causa
Civil Procedure Banking Law Summary Judgment Loan Agreements Mortgage Security Forgery Limitation Period Ex Turpi Causa

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited

Appellant

Marvalyn Taylor-Wright

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment should be granted when the defendant admits borrowing but disputes the authenticity of a promissory note
  2. 2 Whether the bank's claim is solely based on the promissory note or includes other documents
  3. 3 Whether alternative defences (single document rule, taint by forgery, ex turpi causa, limitation) require a trial

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was appropriate because the defendant's admission of borrowing and the supporting documents (commitment letter, Note 2, mortgages) established the bank's entitlement to relief, regardless of the forgery allegation, and no alternative defence raised a triable issue.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of Sykes J restored
  • Bank to have its costs of the appeal, both before the Board and in the court below