Promontoria (Chestnut) Ltd v Simpson & Anor [2020] EWHC 2136 (Comm) (22 July 2020)

Promontoria (Chestnut) Ltd v Simpson & Anor [2020] EWHC 2136 (Comm) (22 July 2020)

The defendants' proposed amendments to the defence disclosed no real prospect of success because the evidence established that the deed of assignment was effective, the sale and purchase agreement and novation did not effect a prior assignment, the security agreement with Nomura was a charge not an absolute assignment, and there was no breach of the Payment Services Regulations. The redacted material was irrelevant, and the claimant had title to sue. Accordingly, permission to amend was refused.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2136 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Promontoria (Chestnut) Limited; Defendant: Scott Simpson; Defendant: Tracy Simpson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (guarantee Enforcement) / Interlocutory Judgment on Defendants' Applications to Amend Defence, Stay Proceedings, and for Specific Disclosure
Outcome
Defendants' applications to amend defence, stay proceedings, and for specific disclosure refused.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Debts, Guarantee Enforcement, Disclosure of Documents, Redaction of Documents, Payment Services Regulations, Joinder of Parties, Security Interests
Commercial Law Banking Law Civil Procedure Assignment of Debts Guarantee Enforcement Disclosure of Documents Redaction of Documents Payment Services Regulations +2 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Promontoria (Chestnut) Limited

Claimant

Scott Simpson

Defendant

Tracy Simpson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (guarantee Enforcement) / Interlocutory Judgment on Defendants' Applications to Amend Defence, Stay Proceedings, and for Specific Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deed of assignment was effective to transfer the relevant rights to the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the sale and purchase agreement or novation agreement effected a prior assignment to another entity
  3. 3 Whether the security agreement with Nomura International Limited amounted to an absolute assignment or a charge

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants' proposed amendments to the defence disclosed no real prospect of success because the evidence established that the deed of assignment was effective, the sale and purchase agreement and novation did not effect a prior assignment, the security agreement with Nomura was a charge not an absolute assignment, and there was no breach of the Payment Services Regulations. The redacted material was irrelevant, and the claimant had title to sue. Accordingly, permission to amend was refused.

Court Disposition

Defendants' applications to amend defence, stay proceedings, and for specific disclosure refused.

Orders

  • Permission to re-amend defence refused
  • Application for stay of proceedings refused