Society of Lloyd's v. Robinson and Another, (1999)

Extract

---

Society of Lloyd's v. Robinson and Another, (1999)

HOUSE OF LORDS

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Lord Woolf M.R.

Lord Steyn

Lord Hope of Craighead

Lord Hutton

OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE

SOCIETY OF LLOYD'S

(RESPONDENTS)

v.

ROBINSON

(APPELLANT)

AND ANOTHER

ON 25 MARCH 1999

LORD BROWNE-WILKINSON

My Lords,

I have had the advantage of reading in draft the speech which has been prepared by my noble and learned friend, Lord Steyn. I agree with it, and for the reasons which he has given I would dismiss the appeal and allow the cross-appeal.

LORD WOOLF M.R.

My Lords,

I have had the advantage of reading in draft the speech which has been prepared by my noble and learned friend, Lord Steyn. I agree with it, and for the reasons which he has given I would dismiss the appeal and allow the cross-appeal.

LORD STEYN

My Lords,

This appeal by a representative Lloyd's underwriter and cross-appeal by Lloyd's is yet another phase in the seemingly endless litigation which has plagued Lloyd's in recent years. The issues all relate to the Premium Trust Deed (the PTD) which each underwriting member of Lloyd's, or Name, must execute. The relevant provisions of the PTD are as follows:

"Clause 2(a) Subject as hereinafter provided the Trust Fund shall consist of -

(i) All premiums and other monies whatsoever . . . now belonging or payable or hereafter at any time belonging or becoming payable to the Name in connection with the Underwriting and . . ."

Clause 1(a) defines "the underwriting business" as follows:

"The underwriting business (whether current or past or future) of the Name at Lloyd's carried o...

See the full content of this document

---