Society of Lloyds v Price ; Society of Lloyd's v Lee' (327/05) [2006] ZASCA 88; 2006 (5) SA 393 (SCA) (1 June 2006)

Society of Lloyds v Price ; Society of Lloyd's v Lee' (327/05) [2006] ZASCA 88; 2006 (5) SA 393 (SCA) (1 June 2006)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that, in determining prescription for enforcement of foreign judgments, the law with the closest and most real connection to the dispute should apply. Although South African law treats prescription as substantive and English law treats limitation as procedural, considerations of policy, international harmony, and justice require application of English law in this case. The claims were brought within the six-year limitation period under English law and had not prescribed. The respondents were bound by the exclusive jurisdiction clauses and had submitted to English jurisdiction. The means by which Lloyd's obtained the judgments, including service of process...

Citation
[2006] ZASCA 88
Parties
Appellant: Society of Lloyd's; Respondent: Owen John Price; Respondent: Paul Lee
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 June 2006
Case Number
327/05
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Pretoria High Court; Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Appeal upheld; orders of the Pretoria High Court set aside and replaced with orders enforcing the English judgments.
Judges
Howie, Scott, Zulman, Van Heerden, Cachalia
Legal Topics
Conflict of Laws, Prescription, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause, Public Policy, Provisional Sentence
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Conflict of Laws Prescription Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause Public Policy Provisional Sentence

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Society of Lloyd's

Appellant

Owen John Price

Respondent

Paul Lee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Pretoria High Court; Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether South African or English law governs the issue of prescription for enforcement of English judgments in South Africa.
  2. 2 Whether the English court had international jurisdiction to grant the default judgments against the respondents.
  3. 3 Whether recognition and enforcement of the English judgments would be contrary to South African public policy.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that, in determining prescription for enforcement of foreign judgments, the law with the closest and most real connection to the dispute should apply. Although South African law treats prescription as substantive and English law treats limitation as procedural, considerations of policy, international harmony, and justice require application of English law in this case. The claims were brought within the six-year limitation period under English law and had not prescribed. The respondents were bound by the exclusive jurisdiction clauses and had submitted to English jurisdiction. The means by which Lloyd's obtained the judgments, including service of process...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; orders of the Pretoria High Court set aside and replaced with orders enforcing the English judgments.

Orders

  • The appeals are upheld with costs, including costs for two counsel, for which the respondents are jointly and severally liable.
  • The orders of the Pretoria High Court dated 14 January 2005 are set aside and substituted.