NOTE:  Litigation over the law and facts regarding investment in Lloyd’s, applicable law, counterclaims and setoffs has now come to an end. The recent cases concern the validity and enforceability of judgments, arcane bankruptcy issues and fraudulent transfers. We have now deleted the commentary sections formerly included on this page; you can find them archived here.

A Comment, Aug. 30, 2011:

The Falun Gong, the Chinese religious sect persecuted by the communist government of China, had it about right in discussing the Tropp case (although their illustration editor confused the Society of Lloyd’s with Lloyds TSB): the UK courts sided with the wrongdoers. Their article was published June 2, 2011. There should have been no surprise when on July 19 the US Supreme Court likewise sided with the securities sellers deemed by governments to be "too big to fail"; see docket. “Too big to fail” means also “too big to sue” (a article).

The CEOs and other senior executives of the Wall Street firms that brought down the world economy were, with few exceptions, allowed to walk away with the immense wealth they took from the middle classes though complex derivatives and fake hedges. But they were only copying a technique that Lloyd’s management and agents had used years before when they reinsured their own risks cheaply at the expense of new small investors.

The tragedy of so many of the Lloyd’s victims is that they continued to trust in Lloyd’s leadership until too late: the worst off were those who tried to “trade through” and, for a different reason, those who, thinking that membership in Lloyd’s afforded status and a cachet, brought in their spouses as members as well: thus assuring that they could not, when Lloyd’s began to collapse, benefit from quite legitimate and legal bankruptcy and asset protection strategies. Those who somehow thought that “morality” required them to impoverish themselves to try to make Lloyd’s whole missed the point (as well as the opportunity to minimize disaster) because just as toxic mortgage debtors who refuse to walk away from their losses are laughed at by the bankers who profited so handsomely with incentive bonuses and outsized salaries and pensions in the USA and the UK, the evildoers themselves were not the true creditor or beneficiary of the investor’s or borrower’s largess: the losses of those institutions “too big to fail” were socialized, nationalized and paid by the State and the taxpayer.

By now those who spent a decade defending and/or fighting against Lloyd’s — mostly on the false premise that the court system of one or another country would “do justice” — are either deceased (like A. Carey Harrison III) or have moved on. Those who fared best were those who acted early to ring-fence their assets: as articles and documents listed elsewhere on this page demonstrate, there was plenty of time (4 years in most U.S. states; six in New York (as the Madoff Ponzi clawback actions by trustee Irving Picard have shown, New York claims are limited in most cases to 6 years: Google ‘madoff clawback statute of limitations’). Our early writing warned Lloyd’s investors to act quickly to prevent Lloyd’s from ever getting an English judgment that might be enforced elsewhere without limit of time. Those who successfully filed bankruptcy in the USA, including a number of British, Canadian and other residents with some connection to the USA or US property) succeeded about half the time. This is comparable to the success rate of individual bankruptcies generally in the USA. Interestingly, Lloyd’s did not generally contest the early bankruptcies. And when Lloyd’s did start to object, it reserved its intervention for cases in which it had reasonable hope for success. Early cases (before Lloyd’s had precedent on its side) tended to get through to discharge even when the debtor had significant assets.

We close with a word of warning: the “best prospects” list for a scammer or a Ponzi operator or any con artist is always a list of victims of previous scams. One hopes that lessons can be learned from the Lloyd’s imbroglio, but the history of scams and investment failures over the past two decades and more shows that Government is largely on the wrong side; and this is unlikely to change, especially as politicians are now so dependent upon the very rich to finance their campaigns, and the “very rich” are (especially since the US Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission) free to do so with other people’s money.

What this Web site is for:

This site consists of a database containing all known published judgments and significant court documents relating to litigation between the Society of Lloyd’s and the investors it recruited. It is provided as a free public service: the editor, “”, a qualified lawyer and legal writer, accepts no referrals from this site.

While the site was conceived and built in the interests of the investors being pursued by Lloyd’s, the documents are posted without alteration or interference of any kind whatsoever and without regard to whether or not they support one side or the other. Full citations are provided so that researchers and lawyers may easily have access to the originals.

In addition to purely procedural issues, the litigation covers three important matters: (1) private international law (conflict of laws): what jurisdiction shall hear the dispute and which country’s laws shall apply; (2) whether counterclaims or setoffs (usually framed in terms of fraud or negligence by Lloyd’s or its directors) may be asserted against claims by Lloyd’s; (3) whether securities (financial services) laws apply. Other cases included here relate to cross-border enforcement of judgments and bankruptcy matters.

The most startling conclusion from reading the collected documentation — case reports, diplomatic correspondence, lobbyists’ submissions, law review articles — is the politicization of what, a decade or two before, would have been addressed (in America at least) purely in securities regulation terms.

Canadian Judgments

Society of Lloyd’s c/ Allard, Nov. 4, 2003, Docket: Cour Supérieure, Hull 550-17-000925-030, 2003 WL 22663421, Québec 2003

Society of Lloyd’s c/ Alper, Cour supérieure, Montréal, June 9, 2004

Ash v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 8 O.R.(3d) 282, Apr. 23, 1992 (Canadian Names Ass’n case)

Ash v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 60 O.A.C. 241 (Ont. C.A. 1992)

Ash v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 1991 Carswell Ont 475, 7 C.P.C. (3d) 343, 87 D.L.R. (4th) 65, (sub nom. Ash v. Lloyd’s Corp.) 6 O.R. (3d) 235

Ash v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 1992 Carswell Ont 450, 7 C.P.C. (3d) 372, 95 D.L.R. (4th) 766, 9 O.R. (3d) 755 at 761, 60 O.A.C. 241 at 261(costs issues)

Ash v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 1992 Carswell Ont 449, 7 C.P.C. (3d) 364, 94 D.L.R. (4th) 378, 9 O.R. (3d) 755, 60 O.A.C. 241 (rescission, fraud, forum selection issues)

Royal Bank v. Bell, 1998 Carswell N.B. 431, N.B. Ct. of Q.B., 1998 (bank seeking summary judgment for letters of credit issued as security for Lloyd’s underwriting)

Crockett v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 2000 A.C.W.S.J. 512251, 100 A.C.W.S.(3d) 569 (P.E.I.Sup. Ct. Trial Div. 2000) (refusal of stay)
same, from CANLII server

Royal Bank of Canada v. Darlington, Ont. Ct. of J., Gen. Div., Apr. 19, 1995, 1995 ACWSJ 77120; 54 A.C.W.S.(3d) 738

Royal Bank of Canada v. Darlington, Ont. Ct. of J., Gen. Div., Feb. 16, 1994, (1994) 112 D.L.R. (4th) 210; 1994 ACWSJ 16828; 45 A.C.W.S. 3d 890 (same case; motion for production of documents; question of professional privilege)

Drummie v. Society of Lloyd’s, 94 A.C.W.S.(3d) 472 (N.B. Ct. App. 2000) (forum non conveniens)
same, from CANLII server

In re Drummie (Q.B.N.B., Bankruptcy, Oct. 7, 2002)
from CANLII server

Royal Bank of Canada v. Drummie (Q.B.N.B. Bankruptcy, July 25, 2002)
from CANLII server

In re Hefler (Bankruptcy, Nova Scotia, May 7, 1997) (allowance of Lloyd’s claim in bankrupcy without reduction for R&R settlement offer, unpaid by debtor or trustee; no asset case; 75-year-old debtor – another obviously inappropriate candidate for investment in Lloyd’s)

In re McDonough, 2001 A.C.W.S.J. 614276, 107 A.C.W.S.(3de) 363 (Ont. Super. Ct. Bankr. 2001) (debtor required to answer questions regarding his financial dealings occurring more than 5 years prior to bankruptcy)

Society of Lloyd’s v. McNeill, P.E.I. Trial Div. in chambers, 2003 Carswell P.E.I. 121, 2003 PESCTD 88, 233 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 37, 693 A.P.R. 37, Nov. 7, 2003
— same, 2003 Carswell P.E.I. 103, 2003 PESCTD 76, 230 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 54, 682 A.P.R. 54, PEI SC (in chambers), Sept. 24, 2003

Society of Lloyd’s v. Meinzer (Ct. App. Ont., Aug 29, 2001) (reciprocal enforcement of judgments; denial of natural justice)
same, from CANLII server
same case, ruling on costs, from CANLII server

Society of Lloyd’s c/ Minkoff, Greffe de Montréal, 25 juin 2004, Aff. no. 500-09-014284-046 (enforcement of English judgment, opinion in French)
same, Cour supérieure du Québec, Feb. 5, 2004 (in English), 2004 Carswell Que. 324
another copy, Feb. 5, 2004
same, Cour supérieure du Québec, Nov. 26, 2003 (in French), 2003 Carswell Que. 3157
another copy, Nov. 27, 2003

Bank of Montreal v. Mitchell, 143 D.L.R. (4th) 697 (Ont. Ct. Gen. Div., Feb. 19, 1997) (Bank of Montreal paid letters of credit in favor of Lloyd’s following suit in English court; banks granted judgment against Canadian Lloyd’s investors for reimbursement)
same, Acrobat PDF format

Morrison v. Society of Lloyd’s, 1999 ACWSJ LEXIS 11080; 1999 ACWSJ 18279; 85 A.C.W.S. 3d 43; [2000] I.L.Pr. 92 (N.B. Q.B. Jan. 11, 1999) (forum non conveniens)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Philip, Ct. App. Ontario, Apr. 11, 2003 (denial of adjournment to prepare evidence)
from CANLII server
— same, 2002 Carswell On.t 5090; Ontario Superior Court of Justice; October 1, 2002

In re Regan, 2001 A.C.W.S.J. 612023, 105 A.C.W.S.(3d) 14 (N.B. Q.B. Bankr., Apr. 24, 2001) (Lloyd’s motion to deny debtor’s discharge denied despite transfer of marital home)

In re Regan, 2002 A.C.W.S.J. 690723, 109 A.C.W.S.(3d) 685 (N.B.Q.B. Trial Div., Nov. 13, 2001) (Lloyd’s entitled to all documents held by debtor’s accountants)
same, from CANLII server, 2001 NBQB 2002

Rozsa v. A.C.W.S.(3d) 1046, 2001 Carswell Ont. 1438 (refusal of stay; forum non conveniens)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Saunders, Ont. Super. Ct. of Justice, Feb. 9, 2000 (enforcement of English judgment)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Saunders, 55 O.R.(3d) 688, 210 D.L.R.(4th) 519 (Ct. App. Ont. 2001), affirmed on appeal, Ont. Ct. App., Aug. 21, 2001
same, Acrobat PDF format
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Smith, 2004 Carswell Ont. 3423 (Ontario Master, Aug. 2004) (question of interim injunction relating to policies issues by defendant purporting to bind Lloyd’s)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Van Snick, 95 A.C.W.S.(3d) 846 (N.S. Sup. Ct. 2000) (reciprocal enforcement of judgments)
same, from CANLII server
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Van Snick, 98 A.C.W.S.(3d) 77 (N.S. Ct. App. 2000) (same case in Court of Appeal)

Bank of Nova Scotia v. VanSnick, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, May 19, 1998, C.A.143488 (letter of credit issues)

SEC issues

Letter to Congressman Pease, Aug. 5, 1991

SEC brief amicus curiae in Richards case

Bearcave archived articles:
WSJ, Mar. 28, 1996
WSJ, May 8, 1996
WSJ, Aug. 13, 1996
WSJ, Aug. 28, 1996

NOTE: Researchers and lawyers addressing SEC matters may wish to check the SEC computer files in Washington and examine Lloyd’s managing agents Regulation D submissions beginning around 1987: they were trivially, carelessly, erroneously and fraudulently completed and submitted, but no court has been asked to address the issue, and the SEC itself (evidently for political reasons) has declined to do so on its own initiative. We believe that the submissions were an afterthought by LeBoeuf Lamb to try to avoid (as in the end they successfully did) securities fraud claims.

Equitas issues

Table of Equitas court cases in the USA with links to available opinions

We are thrilled that Equitas visits our siterepeatedly and, indeed, watches us watching them! — And see, similarly, the visit of Aug. 22 of the FSA. (We do not record visits unless we happen to see a visit by Lloyd’s or a governmental department, but Statcounter maintains a rolling record of the last 100 page downloads from our site, which then scroll off. Since we rarely hear from visitors, this is our only way of knowing which pages are popular and useful and of spotting possible broken links. There are many silent lurkers: we have found, for example, that every time a page of ours is linked by or we get as many as three dozen hits to that page from the link in the next 24 hours.)

Evening Standard article on Equitas results (June 8, 2004)
archived copy

A Washington DC law firm’s analysis of the Equitas report
same, from firm’s server, in PDF format (may be a later version than our archived copy)

Lawyer Kevin Coluccio’s ASBESTOS LAW BLOG (occasional comments on Equitas)

An (apparently experimental) MESOTHELIOMA legal assets page

Dispute Resolution Management, Inc.: “Insolvent Carriers
archived copy

Hampden Private Capital handout: “Equitas reinsured Names”

See Browning Ferris, Malone and Union Pacific cases, at right (yellow list)
Equitas is also mentioned in the Ashenden, McMurray estate and Turner (U.S. federal) cases. From our standpoint, the key issue is the courts’ affirmation of Lloyd’s contractual right to impose Equitas (or any other reinsurance) premiums upon unwilling, dissenting and resigned Lloyd’s investors and to sue for that premium. Only those Names whose future liability to Lloyd’s was canceled by bankruptcy or death (in most US jurisdictions and many foreign ones, estates and heirs cease to be liable for debts of a decedent not claimed in the probate after 6-12 months (but see the McMurray Estate case (actually a situation where a poorly-drafted trust defeated the Name’s intent of protecting his heirs from Lloyd’s) and the Blackwell case, which included estates and heirs (presumably on the basis of transferee liability or possibly fraudulent transfers, in either case under California law).

“[U]ncertainty over long-term reserve development at Equitas remains a negative rating factor [for Lloyd’s].” Guy Carpenter, “The Lloyd’s Market in 2003”, p. 6 (archived)
Guy Carpenter 2004 report on Lloyd’s)

EQUITAS reinsurance and run-off contract, dated 3 Sept. 1996 (iv + 133 pp.)
Contract,scanned & captured (RTF, 320 kb) pp. i-33 & 55-133 - Syndicate schedule (PDF, 6.6 mb)

John M. Sylvester & Stephen M. Goldman, PLI: Suing Equitas On A Lloyd’s Policy: Lifting The London Fog (1999)

Insurance Journal, June 13, 2003: Equitas reports fiscal year results

Halliburton press release, Jan. 28, 2004 on settlement with Equitas over asbestos liability

Society of Lloyd’s v. Levy & Johnson, [2004] EWHC 1860 (Comm.), [2004] All E.R. (D) 566 Jul. (Equitas premium and European law issues)

The Times, June 9, 2004: US asbestos settlement may fail, dooming Equitas expectations

Financial Times, Nov. 9, 2004: Will Equitas come back to haunt the big companies?

Independent on Sunday, Jan. 23, 2005: Equitas fears bankruptcy over $140 billion US asbestosis settlement

The Times, Mar. 29, 2005: “Equitas in £222m pact on Babcock asbestos liability”

Euromoney Institutional Investor, Mar. 30, 2005: “Names question asbestos liability estimate”

National Underwriter, Apr. 19, 2005: “Equitas: Asbestos Bill’s A Bum Deal For Us”

Evening Standard, Apr. 22, 2005: “Lloyd’s to battle US asbestos blow”

Asset Protection issues

(a collection of useful references - not legal advice)

IRS Memo 200036045: tax lien attaches to income interest in spendthrift trust

Jay Adkisson’s fradulent transfer and asset protection sites (include cases and materials, and warnings against charlatans and fraudsters)

Our Bankruptcy and Fraudulent Conveyance page – cases and materials

Morganrogh & Morganroth v. Norris, McLaughlin & Marcus, P.C., 331 F.3d 406 (3d Cir. (N.J.) 2002) (Delorean case; statute of limitations runs only from date of judgment: CA & NJ rule)

SASCO 1997 NI, LLC v. Zudkewich, 767 A.2d 469 (N.J. 2001) (New Jersey)

Cortez v. Vogt, 52 Cal.App.4th 917 (4th Dist. 1997) (California SOL)

Mejia v. Reed, 97 Cal. App. 4th 277 (6th Dist. 2002) (California SOL)

Levy v. Markal Sales Corp., 724 N.E.2d 1008 (Ill. 2000) (Illinois)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Estate of McMurray, 274 F.3d 1133 (7th Cir. (Ill.) 2001) (Illinois)

Offshore Trusts: How the Landmark Cases Have Affected Drafting Issues and Selection of Jurisdiction, 14th Ann. Symposia, Real Property, Probate & Trust Law, ABA, Apr. 3, 2003

Selected English cases on foreign assets and trusts (discussed in the literature, much of which can be found online; they are included here to show the complexity of establishing, and even more so when trying to unwind, a trust, especially one with a foreign connection):
— R. v. Dimsey, [2000] Q.B. 744 (“shadow director” of offshore company held liable for tax)
— Lord Chetwode v. Inland Revenue Comm’rs, [1976] 1 ALL ER 641, [1976] 1 WLR 310 (transfer or assets abroad for tax avoidance)
— Gibbon v. Mitchell, [1990] 1 W.L.R. 1304 (deed of trust set aside for mistake)
In re Tucker, [2000] B.P.I.R. 876 (Jersey) (promoter of “Rossminster Group” tax avoidance scheme made bankrupt in England; Jersey assets seized by English receiver)
— Green v. Cobham, [2002] S.T.C. 820 (CGT, nonresident trust; retirement of trustee from practice as solicitor, rendering trust subject to UK capital gains tax; reformation allowed)
— Abacus Trust Company (Isle of Man) Ltd and another v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, [2001] STC 1344 (trustees must have regard to fiscal consequences of their decisions)
— Amp (UK) Ltd plc v Barker and others, [2001] W.T.L.R. 1237 (mistaken amendment of pension plan)

United States v. Estate Preservation Servcies, 202 F.3d 1093 (9th Cir. 2000) (injunction against sale of asset protection trusts for (US) tax evasion purposes)

Marc M. Harris et Cie. v. Marchant, USDC, SD Fla, 1999: offshore fraud, libel case

Re the petition of John William McLean, (1998/98) 1 O.F.L.R. 818 (tax bankruptcy of William Basil McCoy: Manx court honored Northern Irish court order)

Forbes v. Forbes, (1854) Kay 341, 69 E.R. 145
Udy v. Udny, (1869) LR 1 Sc. & Div. 441 (H.L.)
— Adams v. Smith (In re Estate of Jones), 192 Iowa 78, 182 N.W. 227 (1921)
F.T. Piggott, The Ligeance of the King (1915)
Clive Parry, British Nationality Law and the History of Naturalisation (1954)

Theophile v. Solicitor General, [1950] A.C. 186 (absconded businessman has not “ceased trading” in England for purposes of jurisdictional provisions of bankruptcy law until all debts have been paid)

In re Tucker (a bankrupt), [1990] Ch. 148 (extraterritorial bankruptcy jurisdiction)

M. Paulsen & M. Sovern, “‘Public Policy’ in the Conflict of Laws”, 56 Colum. L. Rev. 969 (1956)

Orams v. Apostolides, [2006] EWHC 2226 (QB), [2006] All ER (D) 20 (Sep) (inapplicability of European law in Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, pending reunification of the Island. The case has been referred to the European Court of Justice for a ruling on points of European law.)

Law Review Articles

for academic and scholarly research purposes only
(Not one article could be found that supports the US courts’ decisions favoring Lloyd’s – underlining the political nature of these cases)

Kristine Padden, “Casenote: Choice of Forum, Choice of Law, and Arbitration Clauses Override U.S. Security Rights: Riley v. Kingsley Underwriting Agencies, Inc., 6 Transnat’l Law. 431 (1993)

Jennifer M. Eck, NOTES: Turning Back the Clock: A Judicial Return to Caveat Emptor for U.S. Investors in Foreign Markets, 19 N.C.J. Int’l L. & Com. Reg 313 (1994) (RTF)

Ian Kelley, “Note: Regulatory Crisis at Lloyid’s of London: Reform From Within”, 18 Fordham Int’l L.J. 1924 (1995)
another copy

John Goldring, Consumer Protection, the Nation-State, Law, Globalization, and Democracy, 2 J. Computer-Mediated Communication (Sept. 1996)

Darrell Hall, “No Way Out: An Argument Against Permitting Parties to Opt Out of U.S. Securities Laws in International Transactions”, 97 Colum L. Rev. 57 (1997)

David A. Fitzgerald, Allen v. Lloyd’s of London: A Comment on Forum Selection, 30 Conn. L. Rev. 257 (1997) (RTF)

“Current Decisions”, 64 Defense Counsel J. 623 (1997)

Comment: Richards v. Lloyd’s of London: The Ninth Circuit Denies Access to the Securities Laws to American Investors, 24 Bklyn. J. Int’l L. 625

Jon A Jacobson, “Other International Issues: Your Place or Mine: The Enforceability of Law/Forum Clauses in International Securities Contracts”, 8 Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L. 469 (1998) (RTF)
same, Duke Univ. server

Richard Garnett, Stay of Proceedings in Australia: A ‘Clearly Inappropriate’ Test?, 23 Melb. U. L. Rev. 30 (1999) (RTF)

Melissa Coulombe Beauchesne, NOTES AND COMMENTS: “Lloyd’s of London and Diversity Jurisdiction: Analyzing the Citizenship of a Unique Organization”, 5 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 217 (1999) (RTF)

Philip J. McConnaughay, “Reviving the ‘Public Law Taboo’ in International Conflict of Laws”, 35 Stan, J. Int’l Law 255 (1999)

Howard M. Tollin & Mark Deckman, “Lloyd’s of London and the Problem with Federal Diversity Jurisdiction”, 9 J. Transnat’l L. & Policy 289 (2000)

Courtland H. Peterson, “Choice of Law and Forum Clauses and the Recognition of Foreign Country JudgmentsRevisited Through the Lloyd’s of London Cases”, (2000)

Lawrence Collins, “Choice of Law and Choice of Jurisdiction in International J. Int’l & Comp. L. 618 (2001) (RTF) (Lord Justice Collins is a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary in the House of Lords. He is co-author and general editor of Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws)

John B. Haarlow & Hugh C. Griffin, Equitas Under English Law, 38 Tort Trial & Ins. Prac. L.J. 1 (2002) (RTF)

Erin Ann O’Hara, “The Jurisprudence And Politics Of Forum-Selection Clauses”, 3 Chi. J. Int’l L. 301 (2002) (RTF)

Xiang Gao & Ross P. Buckley, “A Comparative Analysis of the Standard of Fraud Required Under the Fraud Rule in Letter of Credit Law”, (2003) Oxford U Comparative L Forum 3

Genevieve Saumier, “What’s in a Name? International Comity and Public Policy”, 37 Can. Bus. L.J. 418 (2002)

Selected Lloyd’s insurance & other relevant cases

Jacobson v. Frachon, 138 Law Times Rep. 386 (Ct. App. Nov. 23, 1927) (even fraud, if it could have been addressed by a foreign court, will not prevent enforcement in England of a foreign judgment)

Re: A Firm of Solicitors (Practice Direction), [1992] 2 Q.B. 959. [1992] 2 W.L.R. 809, [1992] 1 All E.R. 353 (C.A., 24 May 1991) (conflict of interest, duty of confidentiality, Howden, Sphere Drake, Lloyd’s syndicates) Compare proposal for “Chinese wall” with US conflict of interest rules.

Allendale Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Excess Ins. Co. Ltd., 970 F.Supp. 265 (Jul. 8, 1997) - 992 F.Supp. 271 (Aug. 19, 1997) - 992 F.Supp. 278 (Feb. 3, 1998) (finding defendants breached forum selection clause by bringing suit in England; but plaintiffs breached duty of utmost good faith by failing to reveal results of survey report; refusal by court to reconfigure case to allow federal diversity jurisdiction)

Agnew v. LANSFORASKRINGSBOLAGENS A.B., House of Lords, [2000] UKHL 7, [2000] 1 All ER 737 (17 Feb. 2000) (EU Insurance Directive inapplicable to reinsurance)
same, from BAILII server (HTML)

Aneco Reinsurance Underwriting Limited v Johnson & Higgins Limited, H.L., Oct. 18, 2001, [2001] UKHL 51 (HTML, Stationery Office server)

ANECO Reinsurance Underwriting Ltd (in liquidation) v. Johnson & Higgins Ltd, [1998] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 565 (Ct. App. 1997)

ANECO v. Johnson & Higgins, Ct. App. 30 July 1999, same case [1999] EWCA Civ 2035
same, from BAILII server

Baker (Syndicate 126 at Lloyd’s in 1982) v. Lombard Continental, Ct. App. 24 Jan. 1997
Lawtel summary

Boghos v. Certain U/W at Lloyd’s of London, 109 Cal.App.4th 1728 (6th App. Dist 2003) (disability policy; non-enforcement of arbitration provision in policy)
COMMENT: Trial Lawyers for Public Justice

Carvill v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, [2000] STC (SCD) 143 (taxation matter, treaty excess of loss reinsurance)

Chagos Islanders v. Attorney General & British Indian Ocean Territory Comm’r, [2001] Q.B. 1067, [2003] EWHC 2222 (QB) (9 Oct. 2003) (Discusses problem of attributing dishonesty of individuals to a corporate body, citing Jaffray v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2002] EWCA Civ 1101.)
same, from court server

Corfield v. Dallas Glen Hills LP, 355 F.3d 853; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 2632 (5th Cir. 2003) (Diversity jurisdiction)

Transit Cas. Co. (in receivership) v. Certain U/W at Lloyd’s of London, Cole Co., Mo., Case CV595-2CC, Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendations (1998)

Curiale v. DR Insurance Company (S.Ct. N.Y. County 1992) (reinsurance issues)

D P Mann & Ors v. Coutts & Co (Q.B.D., Comm’l Ct., 16 Sept. 2003 Telegraph Law Rep. 25 Sept. 2003 (“claimants’ failure properly to investigate whether HMU was operating a client account was unreasonable and broke the chain of causation”)
Full text , 65 pp. scanned & captured from Court’s draft (RTF)

DeLeon v. Lloyds London, 259 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2001) (life insurance case; worker’s compensation; well-known tax scheme whereby employers take out life policies on low-paid staff from which staff do not benefit)

Dresser Ind., Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, 106 S.W.3d 767 (C.A. 6th, Tex. 2003) (RTF) (asbestos, question of exhaustion of coverage and status of underlying claims)

E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Lloyd’s & Companies, 241 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 2001)
E. R Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Accident & Casualty Ins. Co., 160 F.3d 925 (2d Cir. 1998)
(RTF) (DES liability cases; issue of Lloyd’s syndicates as “entities” with legal personality; alienage jurisdiction of US District Court satisfied by representatiave defendant, lead underwriter of Lloyd’s syndicate)
160 F.3d 925, from Touro server

F v. F (Duxbury Calculation: Rate of Return), [1996] 1 F.L.R. 833, [1996] Fam. Law 467 (divorce, property separation considering unquantifed liability for Lloyd’s losses)

Feasey v. Sun Life Ass. Co., [2003] EWCA Civ 885, [2003] 2 All ER (Comm) 587 (Ct. App. 26 June 2003) (insurable interest found in matter of protection and indemnity club)
Lawtel summary
— Another version, Court of Appeal, Feasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, [2003] 2 All ER (Comm) 587 (C.A.)
— Court below, Feasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, [2002] All ER (D) 280 (May) (Q.B.D. Comm’l Court)

In re Insurance Antitrust Litigation, 938 F.2d 919 (9th Cir. 1991) (RTF) (brokers boycotting general liability insurers which used nonconforming forms)

J. Barber & Sons v. Lloyd’s Underwriters, [1987] Q.B. 104 (letters rogatory on behalf of plaintiffs in a California case)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Kitsons Environmental Services Ltd., 41 Con.L. Rep. 20, 67 Build. L. Rep. 102 (Q.B.D. Off. Referee 27 May 1994) (RTF) Lloyd’s sues asbestos removal contractor over work at 51 Lime Street)

Inland Revenue Comm’rs v. Laurence Philipps & Co. (Insurance) Ltd., [1947] All E.R. 144, 177 LP.T. 607, 80 Lloyd’s L. Rep. 549, 26 A.T.C. 161, 49 R.&I.T. 389 (K.B.D. 1947) (excess profits tax and Llolyd’s investor issues)

Lindner Fund, Inc. v. Polly Peck Int’l Plc, 811 F.Supp. 133 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (forum non conveniens judgment in securities fraud claim)

London Market Insurers v. Superior Court 146 Cal.App.4th 648, 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 154 (Cal.App. 2 Dist., 2007). (Kaiser Cement & Gypsum case, issue is whether each asbestos injury constitutes a separate “incident” for policy coverage)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Lost in Space S.A., WIPO arbitral decision D2002-0550, Aug. 2, 2002 (domain name “” offered to Lloyd’s for $2,500 in default of which used to advertise and sell pornography)

Luce v. Lloyd’s of London, 868 F.Supp. 625 (D.Vt. 1994) (removal to federal court refused; out of time)

McAleer v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, 1996 Mass. Super. LEXIS 350 (Norfolk, 1996) (Lloyd’s policy; venue selection clause enforced; case dismissed)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Padway Holdings Ltd., Ct. App. Civ. Div. 27 Apr. 1988 (Lloyd’s claim under broker’s guarantee)

Re Pan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd, Ch.D. 22 July 2003, [2003] EWHC 1696 Ch. (PDF), WestlawUK/Electronic Telegraph 2 Oct. 2003 Best exit route for creditors of insurance company was scheme of arrangement rather than compulsory winding up; held consistent with ECHR Art. 6 and Human Rights Act 1998)
Lawtel summary

Point O’woods Assn. v. Those U/W at Lloyd’s, Sup. Ct., N.Y. Law J., Mar. 4, 1999 (Lloyd’s excess policy; question of NY law on “material misrepresentation”)

Reider v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, 47 Conn. Supp. 202, 784 A.2d 464 (Super. Ct. 2001) (potential liability of auditors for insolvency of insurance company)

Saunders v. Lloyd’s of London, 113 Wn.2d 330, 779 P.2d 249 (1989) (sufficiency of evidence)

Scheiner v. Wallace (Lloyd’s U/W), 832 F.Supp. 687 (S.D.N.Y. 1993) (RTF) (apparent insurance fraud; forum selection issues)

Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp. v. Simon (In re Simon), 153 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 1998) (foreign creditor with foreign-based claim sanctioned for violation of US bankruptcy discharge; within the limits of the holding in the case (the creditor bank had filed a proof of claim in the bankruptcy) this principle would impede or prevent Lloyd’s from proceeding anywhere against a Lloyd’s investor who had been discharged in a US bankruptcy. The holding of the 9th Circuit is consistent with the English common law, whereby a discharge bars action to collect a debt if (a) the dischaerge is granted in the jurisdiction whose law is also the “proper law ” of the debt or claim, or (b) the creditor appeared, or filed a proof of debt (claim) in the bankruptcy proceeding.) See the Brady case, below.

Syndicate 1242 at Lloyd’s v. Morgan Reed & Sharman Ltd., [2001] EWHC 499 (Comm) (RFT)
from BAILII server

T&N Ltd. (in administration) v. Royal and Sun Alliance, [2003] EWHC 1016 (Ch.) (Federal Mogul Group asbestos issues involving Lloyd’s reisnsurance) (HTML from BAILII server)

Taher v. Towey (Ct. App. Civ. Div. 18 Mar. 1999) (question of transfer of acdtion from QBD to Ch.D. underlying issue is receivership of defendant’s property under Lloyd’s brokers security and trust deed; Mareva injunction)

Lloyd’s Syndicate 609 v. United States of America, 780 F.Supp. 998 (ASCII) (S.D.N.Y. 1991) (sovereign immunity for loss of aircraft in military action)

Lloyds’ London v. The Narrows, L & L Enterprises (1/29/93), 846 P 2d 118 (Alaska 1993) (Alaska restaurant – denial of coverage case; reversal and remand of judgment for insured)

Booker ex rel. Certain U/W at Lloyd’s v. Pettey, 770 So.2d 39 (Miss. 2000) (RTF) (question of fact relating to cancelation of cover)
another copy

Lloyd’s Syndicate 609 v. United States, 780 F.Supp. 998 (S.D.N.Y. 1991) (RTF) (sovereign immunity)

Barclays Plc v. Villers, [2000] EWHC Comm. 197 (25 Jan. 2000) (RTF) (Barclays de Zoete Wedd claims involving Equitas and the Lloyd’s settlement)
from BAILII server

Healy v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, [2004] EWCA Civ 262 (Lloyd’s admitted failing to supply its employee health insurance to which she was entitled; issue of quantum of damages)

Rokeby-Johnson v. Kentucky Agric. Energy Corp., 108 A.D.2d 336, 489 N.Y.S.2d 69 (1st Dept. 1985) (ASCII) (action by Lloyd’s syndicates for rescission of policy; stay of NY action pending outcome of Calif. suit)

Tonicstar Limited v. American Home Ins. Co., 2004 EWHC 1234 (Comm.) (anti-suit injunction against New York litigation)

Owusu v. Jackson, ECJ judgment: Case C-281/02, Mar. 1, 2005; Ct. App. referral: 2002 EWCA(Civ) 877, [2003] PIQR 186 (C.A., June 19, 2002) (referral of the issue to the Luxembourg court) (forum non conveniens principle ineffective when jurisdiction is grounded in Brussels Convention (regulation) rules under circumstances where no other member state is involved; cf. In re Harrods (Buenos Aires) Ltd., [1992] Ch. 72 (C.A.).)

On judicial bias: Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451

On testimony by video-link: Polanski v. Condé Nast Publications Ltd., [2005] 1 W.L.R. 637

Small-business professional company, spousal dividend-income tax case: Jones v. Garnett (Arctic Systems) [2005] EWCA Civ 1553

Gray v. Derderian, 2005 WL 3338373 (U.S.D.C. D.R.I.) (Rhode Island nightclub fire, Feb. 20, 2003; Lloyd’s “does not conduct any insurance business”; Lloyd’s policies had covered the premises at various times prior to 2003. Held: Lloyd’s “owes no duty to Plaintiffs”, cannot be liable for failure to inspect premises for fire safety)

A.W. Chesterton Company v. Massachusetts Insurers Insolvency Fund, 445 Mass. 502 (2005) (Asbestos - state insurance indemnity fund case)

Reports and Documents

European Parliament Draft Report on Lloyd’s and UK compliance with Third Insurance Directive
another copy

European Parliament Committee on Petitions: Comm’r Bolkestein on action against UK authorities, Jan. 22, 2002
archived copy

SEC letter of June 14, 1991 acknowledging preliminary investigation into status of Lloyd’s investements under American securities laws

U.S. Tax Cases

Clifton-Bligh v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2003-44 (insufficiency of proof of Lloyd’s and other losses claimed)

Snell v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 1979-141 (disallowance of deduction for fees and expenses of joining Lloyd’s similarly: Harman v. Comm’r, 72 T.C. 362 (RTF) (NYSE seat))

More v. Comm’r, 115 T.C. 125 (2000) (portfolio capital gains cannot be offset by Lloyd’s underwriting passive activity losses)

Australia, New Zealand & South Africa Judgments

Society of Lloyds v. Price ; Society of Lloyd’s v Lee (327/05) [2006] ZASCA 88; [2006] SCA 87 (RSA) (1 June 2006)

Commonwealth Bank v. White, ex p. Lloyd’s, [1999] V.S.C. 27 (26 Feb. 1999) (refusal to enforce forum selection clause)
same, from AUSTLII server
(see also anti-
suit injunction cases, English QBD, grey section, above right)

Commonwealth Bank v. White, ex p.Lloyd’s, (No.2) [1999] VSC 262 (8, 9, 10, 16 June 1999)

Commonwealth Bank v. White, ex p.Lloyd’s, (No.2) [1999] VSC 400 (22 Oct. 1999)
same, from AUSTLII server

Commonwealth Bank v. White, ex p. Lloyd’s, [1999] V.R. 681

Commonwealth Bank v. White, ex p. Lloyd’s, M101/1999 transcript (11 Feb. 2000)
same, from AUSTLII server

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v White & Anor (No 3), [2000] VSC 259 (20 June 2000) (RTF)
same, from AUSTLII server (HTML)

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v White (No 4), [2001] VSC 511 (21 December 2001)
same, from AUSTLII server

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v White & Anor (No 6) [2003] VSC 90 (11 April 2003)
same, from AUSTLII server

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v White & Anor (No 5), [2002] VSC 566 (RTF) (13 December 2002)
same, from AUSTLII server (HTML).\

Society of Lloyd’s v. Hyslop, [1993] 3 N.Z.L.R. 135 (Ct. App. Wellington 1993) (suit by Lloyd’s investor seeking cancellation of agreements with Lloyd’s her members’ agent and Barclays Bank dismissed)

Dick (Trustee in bankruptcy) v. McIntosh, [2001] F.C.A. 1008 (Federal Ct. Austr., Queesland 2001) (English sequestation order; Australian real property; order of co-operation granted)
same, from AUSTLII server

Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales Registry, 3 (P)NSD1307/2004 Society of Lloyd’s v Marich, Oct. 11, 2004 (no judgment published, or yet published)

Re Mills (Debtor); Ex parte Lloyd’s v. Prentice, BC 9701153 (Fed. Ct. Australia, Gen. Div., Bankr. Dist. 1997) (unreported) (composition set aside; assets sequestered on application by Lloyd’s)
same, from AUSTLII server
same, archived AUSTLII Web page image (PDF)

Williams v. Society of Lloyd’s, [1994] 1 V.R. 274 (Sup. Ct. Victoria, 1992) (forum non conveniens; Lloyd’s investor’s action against English defendants stayed)
Comment: John Goldring, “Consumer Protection … Globalization” (1996)


— European Parliament Committee of Enquiry vote, 9/25/2003: see EP press release :
Parliament adopted a resolution on the Lloyd’s of London petitions 358-0, with 35 abstentions.
— See Guardian article, Sept. 26, 2003, “MEPs drag Lloyd’s inquiry into open”
but the European Commission planned to drop its investigation into UK regulation of Lloyd’s, according to a Sept. 25 report by Reuters, which also reported Sept. 26 on Parliament’s demand to the contrary. See also the European Voice articles and letters, towards the bottom of the green articles & links section below.
— The Scotsman, Oct. 15, 2003: Press Association: “EU Ruling Dashes Hopes for Lloyd’s Names”
Press release of European Commission about ending the inquiry
— UK Parliament, Select Committee on Constitution Written Evidence , Memorandum by Names’ Action for Compensation and Defence in Europe

  •  See Poole v. HM Treasury case, at right

Lloyd’s Acts & Bye-laws, full text

(including Lloyd’s Act 1871 and amendments)

(HTML) (large file, 777 pages)

same, RTF file

Links and downloads,
selected Lloyd’s-related Internet resources

regularly updated, but in random order

LLOYD’S ISSUES FORUM & The Wall Street Journal, 26 Sept. 2001: A.M. Best and Standard & Poors downgrade Lloyd’s to “A-”; any further downgrade will lead many brokers to stop doing business with Lloyd’s
archived copy

“LLOYD’S INFORMATION SERVICE” (Patrick Moore’s site) WSJ Sept. 27, 2001: Lloyd’s of London Faces Record Loss: Attack Payouts May Total $1.91 Billion
archived copy

High Premium Group (“formed in 1994 to represent the interests of ongoing Names in Lloyd’s of London”}
HPG links to Lloyd’s-related Web sites (not updated, many links broken) WSJ July 12, 2002: These Days, ‘Names’ at Lloyd’s Find Investing Can be Costly, Contentious
archived copy

Australian Financial Review: article on the European Commission’s complaint Insurance Advocate, July 28, 2003, p. 38: “A.M. Best announces revised debt rating methodology to provide summarizing data

David K. Mainwaring – draft speech for Sept. 12, 2002 Lloyd’s EGM in London (not delivered as written) The Age (Melbourne): on Australian Lloyd’s investors post-World Trade Center (Aug. 4, 2002)
Another aritcle, on the impact on Names’ of the WTC losses (July 19, 2002)

“A scam that used Lloyd’s of London’s name in vain… R. David Bowman’s Ponzi scheme”, Sacramento Business Journal, Jan. 13, 2003

“Lloyd’s estimates £1.2bn losses from 9/11 attacks”, The Times (London), Sept. 26, 2001

UK Financial Services Authority: “Lloyd’s Sourcebook: Feedback on CP48 & CP66”, March 2001
FSA, Society of Lloyd’s Supervision Arrangements for Underwriting Agents, Enforcement Co-operation Arrangements (49 pp.)
FSA, Dispute Resolution: Complaints – Lloyd’s The Times (London) Sept. 18, 2003: Head of Lloyd’s Warns of High Costs
archived version

Report: organized crime scam at Lloyd’s The Times (London) Sept. 29, 2001: Lloyd’s Demands Higher Levy From Its Syndicates

British & Irish Legal Information Institute (free case reports) FT: July 15, 2002: Lloyd’s Plan Reflects Shift From Names

Rep. Henry Hyde: “U.S. investors in Lloyd’s of London deserve their day in United States court” (Cong. Rec. Aug. 4, 1997) Forbes, July 12, 2002: Lloyd’s Faces the Void
another copy (ASCII)

Business Insurance, Jan. 22, 1996: Lloyd’s of London launches stricter regulations requiring executivs to pass as “fit and proper” indibiduals FSA Handbook: Dispute Resolution - Lloyd’s

American Academy of Actuaries Contingencies, “Name Game: Trouble in the House of Lloyd’s”, May-June 2001
archived copy New York Times, Nov. 3, 2002, “Indiana Court Bars Lawyer For Criticizing An Opinion” (conflict of interest on part of Indiana Supreme Court justice did not stop him from ruling in case)
archived copy
TEXT OF OPINIONS, In re Wilkins, 777 N.E.2d 714 (Ind. 2002) , 782 N.E.2d 985 (Ind. 2003) & 780 N.E.2d 842 (Ind. 2003) (HTML)

Daily Telegraph: “Asbestos claims dust will take years to settle”, 13 Sept. 2003 (history of the asbestos problem, and its implication for reinsurers) archived copy More on Lady Rona Delves Broughton : Sunday Times, July 15, 2002: “Terror attack costs first lady of Lloyd’s £2 million”
another copy (ASCII)

UK FSA, “Response paper on Consultation Paper 16: The Future of Regulation at Lloyd’s”, June 1999 The Times (London), Sept. 19, 2003: Insurer fears cash call backlash (Investors are increasingly aggravated by demands for cash from the general insurance industry)
archived copy

UK FSA, “The Lloyd’s Sourcebook, Feeback on CP48 & CP66”

TIME Europe Cover Story, by David McClintick, Feb. 28, 2000: “The Decline and Fall of Lloyd’s of London”

TIME document file: selected Lloyd’s documents

TIME Europe - “For Whom the Bell Tolls”, Nov. 13, 2000

Australian Insurance Laws Amendment Bill 1997 – comment & explanation

Stanford Law School – Securities Class Action Clearinghouse web site

Greenpeace article on Lloyd’s
another copy

Financial Services Authority: Regulation of Lloyd’s Underwriting Agents
FSA Consultation Paper No. 16: The Future Regulation of Lloyd’s, Nov. 1998

Article: Elborne Mitchell, “A more corporate culture at Lloyd’s”

Electronic Frontier Foundation, List of Church of Scientology cases as of 1997 (like Lloyd’s, a persistent litigator)

“Insurance Solutions” newsletter file, Nov. 1997 – 2001

US National Association of Insurance Commissioners site

American Names Assn. Badgers Lloyd’s Over Effort To Reduce Trust Fund Level, Insurance Advocate; 4/28/2003, Vol. 114 Issue 16, p6, 2p

Lloyd’s of London 1998 Congressional lobbying reports
alternate site

The Economist, June 29, 2000: “That sinking feeling - Does Lloyd’s of London have a future in its new incarnation as an exchange for insurance companies?”

Louisiana State press releases on Lloyd’s

Insurance Journal: California: allegations about Quackenbush, former Insurance Commissioner who helped Lloyd’s

Lloyd’s consultation paper (franchisor-franchisee)

Canadian Supreme Court, Canadian statutes and other selected Canadian legal materials

Lloyd’s names’ estate application form

Findlaw article: Letter of credit litigation, by Hoguet, Newman & Regal 
archived copy

Report on bankruptcy bill proposed revival of US jurisidiction of investors’ complaints (deleted from bill) Washington Post,Mar. 9, 2001

Society of Actuaries: Future role of Lloyd’s of London

New York Law School, Nov. 6, 1996 symposium, “Implication of the Reconstruction of Lloyd’s of London”

Insurance Journal: Abortive federal probe of Lloyd’s in California

Response to Parliamentary question, June 11, 1997: “Mr. Cousins: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if she will review the decision of the last Government not to hold an independent judicial inquiry into the financial affairs of Lloyd’s of London.”

Lyonette Louis-Jacques (University of Chicago Law Library) source list (links) on international securities regulation

“Once a pillar of the insurance business, a venerable institution, and symbol of the British Empire, Lloyd's of London now faces allegations of fraud and a difficult financial future. ”

Evening Standard, Nov. 10, 2002: Vulture fund to bring suit against Lloyd’s Names over inadequate offer by Equitas

Bestwire (A.M. Best), Nov. 21, 2001: Lloyd’s Says U.S. Closes Probe With No Charges (U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York ends investigation into Lloyd’s U.S. activities)

Australian Securities & Investments Commission, Class Order CO-02/318 (conditional relief for Lloyd’s from certain investor protection provisions)

“Names feud could wreck £230bn claim” Names fighting among themselves over the European Union initiative) Mail on Sunday, 21 Sept. 2003 ( archived copy)

Institutional Investor-International Edition; Nov. 2002, Vol. 27 Issue 11, p 69: Reports that Lloyd’s Names have again blocked efforts as of November 2002, by Lloyd’s of London corporate members to force them to relinquish their unlimited liability status as underwriters and join corporate insurance pools, which may be less risky but also are potentially less lucrative

MEP Roy Perry’s speech before the European Parliament on Lloyd’s, 25 Sept. 2003:
HTML format
RTF format

Further sources of free selected British case reports and data (such sites come and go; reliable databases are fee-based and include Justis (Law Reports), Butterworths (All England Reports and Lexis UK) and Westlaw UK.)
The best (fee-based) citator and party-name directory for UK cases is:
Links for Supreme Court cases around the world: European Voice:
23 Sept. 2004: “Lloyd’s back on Parliament’s radar: The EP could still take legal action against the Commission for its role in the controversial Lloyd’s of London affair, an MEP said this week.”
22 April 2004: “Cox ‘no’ to legal action over Lloyd’s”
1 April 2004: “BREAKING NEWS: Deputies opt for Lloyd’s court action”
4 March 2004: “European Parliament cools on Lloyd’s action”
19 Feb. 2004: “Hain wrote to British PM calling for Lloyd’s inquiry”
16 Oct. 2003: Pascoe case brought in Court of First Instance against Commission
(The issues are whether the Commission was right to defer to Britain on past violations, and (of more general interest) whether the House of Lords’ refusal to refer under Art. 234 TEU (177 EC) and European law tolerating this, is a violation of fundamental Community rights. But see the Lyckeskog case, [2002] ECR I-4839).
18 Sept. 2003: “Lloyd’s court case no bar to Parliament probe”
24 July 2003: Euro Commission set to drop probe of Lloyd’s
19 June 2003: Cashman letter, claiming spurious calumny
12 June 12 2003: Earl of Stockton corrects Jaffray claims
5 June 2003: Benningfield dissects Harvey Pitt, Chuck Quackenbush
5 June 2003: UK envoy Sheinwald demeaning UK over Lloyd’s names
28 May 2003: Jaffray letter: ‘Names’ welcome the 21 May decision to implement a full investigation

Barnes & Noble review of Betty Luessenhop’s book, “Risky Business”
Bearcave review of the book

Lloyds: A Follow-Up Review by U.S. State Insurance Regulators, Dec. 6, 1999 (MS Word format)

Bearcave review of Adam Raphael’s book, “Ultimate Risk”

The Wall Street Journal, Nov. 17, 2003, “The Master of Disaster is Trying to Avoid One”

Daily Telegraph, Mar. 18, 2004: “The Old Names may hear their death knell”
Daily Telegraph, Mar. 23, 2004: “Equitas £132m to settle US claims” Richard Astor’s Web site law relating to Lloyd’s and Equitas) (includes links to some of his articles and blurbs on his books)
“Reflections on legal challenges when practising Equitas law”
“A quick introduction to some current legal issues at Lloyd’s”
Equitas under English law
Brief: “Lloyd’s 101” (RTF)

2000 discussion of Lloyd’s potential losses from insuring EMF risks (“greater than asbestos”)

John B. Haarlow & Martin R. Baach, Equitas: Setting the Record Straight, 13 Mealey’s Litigation Report: Insurance, Apr. 13, 1999

Sunday Times Oct. 19, 2003 articles:
“A disgruntled City executive has unlocked one of the Square Mile’s most closely guarded secrets: the identities of the select millionaires who make up the Lloyd’s names.”
Insider names the big Lloyd’s losers
Named: the secret Lloyd’s gambling set
Top names
And the leak of “confidential information” is “under investigation” by Lloyd’s
archived copy of Independent article

Financial Times articles:
Nov. 9, 2004: Will Equitas come back to haunt the big companies?
July 30, 2004: Buffett-backed Lloyd’s merger falters at first fence
July 14, 2004: Buffett invests in Lloyd’s insurer consolidation
Feb. 7, 2004: Legacy of fierce storms darkens future for Names
Jan. 9, 2004: Irish property group to buy Lloyd’s building
Jan. 9, 2004: Lloyd’s building to be sold to Irish group
Apr. 2, 2003: Lloyd’s takes reinsurers to arbitration

Daily Telegraph, Nov. 4, 2003: “Top American analyst blasts underwriters”

A brief suggestion regarding lost insurance policies relating to Lloyd’s cover

The Independent, 5 July 2004: Ten years after Lloyd’s of London scandal, investors face new threat of financial ruin European Commission press release announcing closure of investigation into supervision at lloyd’s (notwithstanding continued European Parliament interest)
an appreciation of the dynamics of this outcome requires some understanding of EU history, EU bureaucracy and intra-EU politics. When we approached Senator Kerry’s staff in 1993 with the facts of Lloyd’s debacle - just weeks after the release of the Committee report on the BCCI scandal - we found a total understanding of the fraud and its significance, but were confronted with the political realism that sourrounds Lloyd’s and that, after all, led to the private Lloyd’s Act 1982. Everything that postdated our meetings in Washington on that day, and all that has appened in Brussels and in London, and all the cases and reports on this page could have been(and largely was, by us) largely foreseen.

Guy Carpenter: The Lloyd’s Market in 2004

UK National Statistics, 2003: Investment by insurance companies, pension funds and trusts

Financial Regulatory Briefing list of Lloyd’s press releases (probably incomplete)

Henry Hyde’s remarks about entitlement to protection of investors in Lloyd’s of London securities, House of Representatives, July 31, 1997 Lloyd’s disciplinary proceedings: list, with verdicts, through 1990 (numerous subsequent cases can be found online, on Lloyd’s Web site. Lloyd’s will, in general. supply printed copies of decisions on request..

Draft amendments to Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act (“The public policy exception in subsection 4(b)(3) of the current Act says that recognition may be denied if ‘the cause of action’ is repugnant to the State’s public policy. Based on this ‘cause of action’ language, some courts have refused to find that a public policy challenge basedon something other than repugnancy of the foreign cause of action comes within this exception. E.g., Southwest Livestock & Trucking Co., Inc. v. Ramon, 169 F.3d 317 (5th Cir. 1999) (refusing to deny recognition to Mexican judgment on promissory note with interest rate of 48%); Guinness PLC v. Ward, 955 F.2d 875 (4th Cir. 1992) (challenge to recognition based on post-judgment settlement could not be asserted under public policy exception); The Society of Lloyd’sv. Turner, 303 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 2002) (rejecting argument legal standards applied to establish elements of breach of contract violated public policy because cause of action for breach ofcontract itself is not contrary to state public policy); cf Bachchan v. India Abroad Publications, Inc., 585 N.Y.S.2d 661 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1992) (judgment creditor argued British libel judgmentshould be recognized despite argument it violated First Amendment because New York recognizes a cause of action for libel). Other courts have applied the public policy exceptionwithout taking any notice of this language. Subsection (c)(3) broadens the public policyexception of current section 4(b)(3) by providing that the ‘judgment’ as well as the cause ofaction can violate public policy. See Study Report, Section III (D)(2)(ii).”) The Economist, Apr. 7, 2004: The Lloyd’s Insurance Market — Unlimited liability on the way out (“In 1990 there were almost 30,000 Lloyd’s “names”, wealthy people who at that time provided the entire backing for the famous London insurance market and were, proverbially, liable “down to their cufflinks” to meet claims. Today, they number barely 2,000; those with unlimited liability are heading into history.”) Comment: I used to write letters to the editor to correct their mischaracterization of Lloyd’s investors as “wealthy” people. Lloyd’s PR machine proved noisier and more effective, however. The truth is better represented by such investors as Mr. Hefler , the 72-year-old Canadian penniless debtor who was made bankrupt in 1997. (link to this article repaired Mar. 19, 2005)

The Times (London), Dec. 27, 2004: Disastrous year for insurance companies

New York Times, Dec. 7, 2004: WTC towers insurers must pay for two separate losses, up to $2.2 billion

New dockets and pleadings from PACER
(see purple section)

The Economist, Sept. 18, 2004, pp. 89-91: Special Report, Lloyd’s of London

New York Times, March 31, 2005: Insurer [AIG] Admits Bad Accounting in Several Deals [with General Re] (compare the time-and-distance policies Lloyd’s syndicates used in a similar way to create fake profits and justify bonuses for underwriters, with investors left to face losses in the future)

Francovich Follow-Up
Cases on State Liability for Breach of European Community Law
Dossier tracks the state of affairs regarding State liability for breach of Community law following the European Court of Justice’s landmark Francovich judgment . The site comprehensively monitors pending cases and discusses the decided ones by the ECJ. Selected judgments by the national courts of a number of EU Member States are covered. The development of a ius commune under 288 EC is discussed. There is also a comparative perspective in terms of EEA law, fundamental rights and private international law.
same, complete site as single PDF file (as of Sept. 2004, 95 pages; Web site may have later version)

Los Angeles Times: Union Carbide and potential horrendous new asbestos liability The Guardian, “Barclays denies fleecing clients” , Oct. 2, 2004: the point here is that by selling short collateralised debt obligations (derivatives) that were supposed to be “low risk” because they were “diversified”, in fact Barclays profited at the expense of its customers because the derivatives were actually high-risk due to incestuous recycling and secret deals. Just like Lloyd’s.

The New York Times, Oct. 15, 2004: Broker Accused of Rigging Bids for Insrance Financial Times, Oct. 23, 2004: Lloyd’s joins chorus seeking greater disclosure of commission arrangements

The Wall Street Journal, Oct. 29, 2004: Hidden Loans May Be Common Practice in Insurance Industry (remember the notorious Lloyd’s time and distance policies?)
WSJ, May 2, 2005, MBIA — another insurance scam, son-of-time-and-distance Hansard, July 13, 2004 : The Government “have no plans to change” provisions of law affording the Society of Lloyd’s immunity from suit in the exercise or omission to exercise a public regulatory function

“Struggle Against Financial Exploitation”

“Ex-Lloyd’s Names”

Speech by Peggy Berton, President of CNA Global Resource Managers, “ Benchmarking & Restructuring Claims Services “ (undated)
from GRMCNA server Kathleen Patchell, Study Report on Possible Amendment of the Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act (June 25, 2003) (mentions Lloyd’s enforcement of judgment cases)

The Times, Nov. 2, 2004: Britain to face £220bn bill for asbestos claims UK Financial Services Authority, Supervision Arrangements for Lloyd’s Underwriting Agents, Enforcement Co-operation Arrangements under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

Time and Distance Policies: Back in the headlines, and this time it’s Berkshire Hathaway. Financial Times, Dec. 30, 2004: “SEC widens insurance probe” (loans disguised as insurance policies to manipulate profits, exactly what happened at Lloyd’s in the 80s and 90s.
— compare the AIG/General Re brouhaha (NY Times, Mar. 31, 2005)
— And see a Pravda English Forum discussion The Independent, July 5, 2004: “Ten years after Lloyd’s of London scandal, investors face new threat of financial ruin”
archived version
Lexis-Nexis version

David H.K. Mainwaring’s petition to the European Parliament (RTF) Daily Business Review, July 2, 2004: Lloyd’s syndicates suing own lawyers for malpractice

WSJ on prospects for individual Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings under the revised Bankrupty Code (which will make Chapter 7 & 13 filings impossible for most Lloyd’s investors (Ch. 7 because of the means test; Ch. 13 because of the Sec. 109 debt limitation). A rather bizarre article by English barrister Richard Astor , self-styled “expert” in Lloyd’s matters, that misunderstands the nature of U.S. bankruptcy proceedings and the reasons why attorneys for some U.S. petitioners sought Court authorization to publish announcements in the press destined to Lloyd’s policyholders and inviting claims. (in fact, such publication is merely intended to strengthen the claim to have discharged future liability by putting potential claimants on notice. Notice is never required, however, in no-asset Chapter 7 bankruptcies and notice to Lloyd’s itself (inclusion on the mailing “matrix” submitted with the bankruptcy petition) is probably constructive notice to its policyholders.)
(original source: )

JTW Reinsurance Consultants research papers

James Hall, “The Sinking of Lloyd’s of London” (Public Commentary, March 2005) Reliance Insurance Company (Penna.) liquidation: documents (Web site)

On Harvey Pitt and Lloyd’s (2002) Freshfields: Insolvency Regime for the Lloyd’s Market (PDF)

On Peter Levene: Investment & securities fraud S.I. 1990 No. 2524: The Lloyd’s Underwriters (Schedule 19A to the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988) Regulations 1990

The Independent, Apr. 23, 2005: On pro-se litigation and how to do it Insurance Journal, Apr. 7, 2005: “S&P Sees No Change in Lloyd’s Ratings”

Did the UK Government orchestrate the “rape of the Names” at Lloyd’s?: The Daily Telegraph on the scamming of the “grannies” who owned Railtrack shares Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 ( United Kingdom income tax law , as amended to April 1, 2005) (HTML, in 10 sections)
same, at HMSO site
Taxation and Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (as amended to 15 April 2005) (large HTML file: 537 A4 pages, 4.7 mb)

ERisk: Case Study, Lloyd’s of London’s expansion into the U.S. market  color="red" European Union legislation in force: Insurance color="black" – See especially: Directive 2001/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings

Lloyd’s Premiums Trust Deed color="black" The Observer, Sept. 4, 2005, color="red" “Insurers face $40bn claims after Katrina”
Daily Telegraph, Sept. 5, 2005, color="red" “Katrina’s trail of destruction spiralling towards $100bn”

Los Angeles Times, Sept. 11, 2005, color="red" “Katrina May Cost U.S. as Much as Two Wars” —  The Wall Street Journal, Sept. 12, 2005, “Claims to Property Insurers Could Be as Much as $60 Billion”; “ S&P … cited commercial insurers, including Lloyd’s of London. Some commercial insurers are exposed through their sales of ‘business-interruption’ policies, which cover certain expenses and lost profits of businesses. … Lloyd’s also is a big insurer of offshore energy installations.”
— The Wall Street Journal, Sept. 15, 2005, “Lloyd’s Estimates Its Katrina Costs At $2.55 Billion”

The Washington Post, Sept. 12, 2005, “Claims Mark Recovery’s Beginning But Deciding How Much Damage Is Attributable to Floods May Get Tricky” The Independent on Sunday, Oct. 2, 2005, “Lloyd’s Names says UK government will cause 20,000 bankruptcies”

Pete Orr Insurance Anti-Fraud Act Media release
Text of statutes (unofficial site; for official version, go to Florida Legislature site Statutory Instrument 2005-1998 “Insurers (Reorganisation and Winding Up) (Lloyd’s) Regulations 2005”
—  Parliamentary comments
—  Text of Directive 2001/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings
—  Text of ECJ judgment of Nov. 18, 2004 in case C-164/04, Commission v. United Kingdom

 Ian Hay Davison, A View of the Room (1987)  Fraud Advisory Panel Web site with links, “designed to provide you with up-to-date information about the Panel and fraud in the United Kingdom”

FT, Feb. 25, 2006: “No such thing as rest in peace for Lloyd’s Names”on the purported liability of estates and heirs to claims of Lloyd’s policyholders after Equitas’ reserves are exhausted Financial Times articles, Oct. 21, 2006, on Warren Buffett’s proposed deal over Equitas
Text of Warren Buffett Interview

Omaha World-Herald, May 5, 2007, “Berkshire’s ties to Lloyd’s grow”

Lloyd's List, May 7, 2007, “Insurance Group campaigns for ex-Lloyd_s names and nuclear plants”

Financial Times, Feb. 3, 2007, “Lloyd's of London regains its luster”

Financial Times, Nov. 9, 2006, “High Court rejects £ 1bn Lloyd's claim”

Madison County Record, Aug. 3, 2005, “After $140 billion is gone asbestos will come right back to state courts, say Democrats”

Alex Brummer, Daily Mail, Mar. 30, 2007, “Lloyd’s bonanza follows Katrina”

Katherine M. Skiba, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, May 20, 2007, “Many state lawmakers are in the millionaires’ club: Filings offer peek into finances of Wisconsin’s congressional delegation” (“House Republican Tom Petri of Fond du Lac reported holdings of more than $8.1 million. That counts a $350,000 partnership in Lloyd’s of London insurance underwriters.”)

Andrew Foxwell, Mail on Sunday, Apr. 22, 2007, “ Names in new legal bid to get cash back” UNO case, hearing on June 6, 2007

Ben Hall, Financial Times, Aug. 20, 2007, Fraud victims ignored by government, says study (reprise of the abandonment of Lloyd’s victims by governments

Michael Lewis, New York Times Magazine, Aug. 26, 2007, In Nature’s Casino (note the article’s comment about the quitupling of insurance rates after Hurricane Andrew—one can only assume that Lloyd’s insiders seized those profits for themselves, through churning: fees and commissions)

Turcan Connell (English law firm) Memorandum on estates of deceased Names (PDF)

Lloyd’s List, Oct. 23, 2007, Lloyd's seeks court gag on former name

Anita Raghavan, The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 27, 2007, “A Legal Battle Against Lloyd’s_Gives Rare View” (Issue raised in Tropp case (U.S. enforcement of judgment case) is U.K. parliamentary intent in passage of the Lloyd’s Act 1982)

Karen Richardson et al., “Jury Convicts Five of Fraud In Gen Re, AIG Case” The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 26, 2008, – Fraudulent reinsurance scam: an echo of Lloyd’s, but by comparison the British Government has rarely mounted successful white-collar crime prosecutions. See also the Natwest Three cases.

Yvette Essen, “Lloyd’s Names assured about their liabilities”, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 22, 2008

Maggie Urry, “Lloyd’s braces itself for downturn”, Financial Times, Apr. 3, 2008

Nick Mathiason, “London’s link to Burmese junta revealed – Lloyd’s insurers underwrite military dictatorship's aircraft and shipping, claims new campaign” Observer, July 27, 2008

Richard Kay, “Jaffray’s Seeds of Happiness”, Daily Mail, Sept. 5, 2008, (“As baronet Sir William Jaffray looks set to end his long-running Names battle with insurance behemoth Lloyd’s of London, he has more good news. He has announced the engagement of his only daughter ...”)

“UK High Court Issues Restraining Order on Lloyd’s Former ‘Names’”, Claims Journal, Sept. 11, 2008

Stephen Greenspan, “Why We Keep Falling for Financial Scams”, The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 3, 2009 (mentions Lloyd’s as said to have drawn investors into a Ponzi scheme by means parallel to that of Bernard Madoff: an “exclusive” club)

Essay, Moral Hazard and Guarantee Arrangements: A Case Study of Lloyd’s

Wikileaks: Lloyds vs. 45 Names on Dec 6, 2007

Transcript of 1993 CBS 60 Minutes program on “Bankruptcy in Florida”

“The Time and Distance Programme of the Gooda Walker Syndicates”, by Randall Insurance Services Ltd., April 1993 (PDF, 9.9 mb.)

Washington Post, May 2, 2010: “Big Money: Debunking the myth of the ‘sophisticated investor’”

Deposition of Jeffrey Stephan in GMAC mortgage foreclosure case, December 10, 2009. This is the same sort of false certification and notarization used from time to time by Lloyd’s and its attorneys in its litigation against its investors

Google Groups (newsgroup archive) mentions of United Names Organisation

Article: “Not Your Average Coffee Shop: Lloyd’s of London—A Twenty–First–Century Primer on the History, Structure, and Future of the Backbone of Marine Insurance” by Jeremy A. Herschaft (A hagiography that ignores the accusations of insider trading, corruption, fraud, securities-law violation and political dealing that went on at Lloyd’s in the 1980s and 1990s)

Reported corruption at the Financial Services Authority

In a surprising incident, the “Plumber” caught the FSA chief and the lead administrative law judge (to use the U.S. terminology) of a securities-law proceeding against one Paul Davidson in flagrante delicto plotting to pervert the course of justice. These are the stories:

Lawyers hit The Plumber, The Mail on Sunday, Nov. 12, 2004

“Plumber” Paul wins back his court costs, Manchester Evening News, Oct. 12, 2006

Plumber wins his fight with the FSA, Daily Telegraph, Oct. 13, 2006
Daily Telegraph editorial

The “Plumber” was fortunate in that he and his investigators were able to videotape one of the members of the tribunal, Terence Mowschenson, QC, walking his dog (dare we write dogging?) miles away from his home and conversation with the head of the FSA's Regulatory Decisions Committee, Christopher Fitzgerald. It’s a pity that the “industry” that sprang up to “defend and advise” Lloyd’s investors in the 1990s, profiting handsomely in the process, made no effort to look into the politicization and the allegations of case-fixing and corruption in the Lloyd’s affair: in the co-opting of the “action groups” by Lloyd’s and the buying of justice.

Abortive securities- and insurance-law prosecutions of Lloyd’s
(mostly news releases, plus a preliminary
assortment of links)

Arkansas Cease and Desist Order


Florida Utah no-action letter

Illinois (included because this press puffery tends to show the priorities of state commissioners: to assure availability of Lloyd’s reinsurance proceeds to cover local risks and the liabilities of bankrupt insurers)

Nat’l Ass’n of Insurance Commissioners, Final Report on Lloyd’s
archived copy

Follow-up Review (1999)    archived copy, Microsoft Word format


another page
Missouri Digital News article on cease and desist order
“Cook takes on Lloyd’s of London” and: the rather crude lawyers at Fried Frank congratulating themselves over having helped Lloyd’s defeat the state prosecutors (well, their guy, Robert E. Gerber, got himself appointed a judge of the Bankruptcy Court in due course, didn’t he)

Ontario Securities Commission, ruling, June 4, 2002
another copy, 26 O.C.S.B. 206

Australian Securities & Investments Commission, CO 02/318 Class Order gives conditional relief from Chapters 5C, 2L and 6D, sharehawking and some PDS content requirements for the Society of Lloyd’s and some agents of underwriting members of Lloyd’s.

A note regarding deletions

July 16, 2009: We have been asked on occasion to remove materials from this site. Materials related to cases reported in the West Reporters and in other official published reports of decisions cannot be removed except by court order for the simple reason that we only mirror the publishers’ sites and even if removed here the document would still appear elsewhere. Unpublished materials may be removed if they relate to a single living individual and are unimportant to the scheme of the site. However even after removal here such materials will remain readily available from PACER, credit bureaus and other public sources whether or not currently indexed on common search engines. (Although court orders may not, themselves, be enforceable in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus if such an order is directed to the main site of publication and if we are informed, our mirror link will be deleted.)



























What’s new:

A. Cary Harrison, a resident of Florida and a constant presence among Americans and others whose lives were damaged or destroyed by having been solicited to invest in Lloyd’s, as they claimed n violation of U.S. securities laws (and as the SEC, far too late to be relevant to the litigation, began to agree), died on April 18, 2003. We have obtained a copy of the printed Service of Thanksgiving for his life, held at St. Luke's Church, Chelsea, on May 21, 2003.

Harry Markopolos’s book No One Would Listen: A True Financial Thriller" makes the point “how truly incompetent the SEC was”. One of our contributing lawyers wrote to the SEC in early 1991 to complain that Lloyd’s had sold unregistered securities to U.S. investors. The SEC acknowledged the complaint, initiated a “pre-investigation” study. And, despite a follow-up visit later by Dale Schreiber of Proskauer Rose LLP did nothing. It appears that political pressure was put upon the SEC by their then (and now defunct) law firm, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae and the British Government, including a reported luncheon meeting between John Major and George H.W. Bush.

The New York Times, July 22, 2014, “After Malaysia Airlines Crashes, the Payments Are Piling Up for Air Insurers” (quoting Lloyd’s Market Association)

Remembering a wonderful person: Henri Rotsaert, died 6th Feburary 2010.

Obituary of Alfred Doll-Steinberg in the Financial Times, June 6, 2012
Doll-Steinberg obituary, Daily Telegraph, June 11, 2012 archived copy

April 19, 2012 & October 9, 2013 According to The Wall Street Journal the successor firm to LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, the lawyers who caused so much grief for investors in Lloyd’s and who were complicit in what so many of those investors saw as a scam, is headed towards a “prepackaged bankruptcy”. What that will do is to wipe out or compromise debts of the firm including deferred compensation, pensions and borrowings. With the departure of so many partners some might think the firm’s reputation is shot anyway. The whole story was published in the October 14, 2013 number of The New Yorker: “The Collapse” Who can shed tears for the shysters, if that’ what they were (they were certainly called that enough times), who wound up paying amounts in the range of $50,000 each to Lloyd’s investors whose tax filings they mishandled due to conflicts of interest?

September 21, 2011 Added decision of U.S. Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Fla., in Lloyd’s suit against Randolph C. Harrison, son of deceased Lloyd’s investor A. Cary Harrison III, seeking to bring a Chapter 15 action ancillary to their insolvency proceeding against Cary’s English estate (the major English asset being any equity beyond the mortgage in his former home, an old rectory in South London). Probate actions in U.S. state courts have fairly short statutes of limitation and Lloyd’ claimed that the Florida heirs had a positive obligation to notify them to bring a probate action (aside from proceedings ancillary to foreign bankruptcies, like this one, insolvencies of American estates must be litigated in state courts). Lloyd’s lost.

August 2011 Matt Taibbi writes in Rolling Stone “Is the SEC Covering Up Wall Street Crimes? A whistle-blower claims that over the past two decades, the agency has destroyed records of thousands of investigations, whitewashing the files of some of the nation’s worst financial criminals.” The answer is that the complaint of U.S. investors in Lloyd’s was rubbished by the SEC as early as 1990-91. Those who deduced early on that politics would trump the law, and who ring-fenced their assets and, perhaps, filed for bankruptcy in the USA, fared best.

More on the Tropp case: Investors Beware of Lloyd’s of London (a blog discussion on perversion of investor protection in the UK and USA, and how the Tropp case may serve to warn US investors of the risks)
U.S. Supreme Court certiorari denied by Tropp v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4826 (U.S., June 27, 2011)

March 2011: Richard Tropp’s pro se appeal to the Second Circuit was dismissed on July 19, 2010. Given the consistent holdings of the cases listed here this is unsurprising. One of our contributing lawyers met Mr. Tropp by chance some years ago in New York City. If Tropp did not engage in asset protection (to the degree legal and feasible, such as maneuvering to benefit from bankruptcy exemptions) he will not have done himself justice. As we know from the foreclosure cases (specifically the way the courts deferred to MERS until very recently) a “respected and powerful” entity like Lloyd’s will often, indeed usually, be given the benefit of doubt even when they claim that documentation (such as a signed copy of the General Undertaking relating to choice of law and forum selection) cannot be found.

October 2010: There are two recent legal trends potentially relevant to the issues of jurisdiction and enforcement raised by some of the cases archived here: (1) The US Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, affirming a limited reach of the US securities laws in relation to transactions on foreign exchanges by foreigners (“F-squared” transactions) and (2) US banks and mortgage servicers litigating foreclosure actions have been found to have forged and otherwise faked documents supporting the chain of ownership of the loans and the authority to bring such actions. Recall that some courts accepted Lloyd's argument in certain enforcement actions that whereas Lloyd’s had “lost” the signed “General Undertaking” the mere fact that Lloyd’s Bye-Laws required such a document as a condition precedent to underwriting meant that every Lloyd’s investor “must” have entered such an engagement, signed the Undertaking.

April 2010: Added report dated April 1993 on “The Time and Distance Programme of the Gooda Walker Syndicates”. This issue is timely because the T&D policies were smoke and mirrors, a means of obfuscating the misappropriation of investors’ money different in method but not in effect to that of Madoff or Goldman Sachs.

March 2010: Posted the submission by the British Government on behalf of Lloyd’s in the Allen case, relating to R&R
Transcript of 1993 CBS 60 Minutes program on “Bankruptcy in Florida”

January 2010: The HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland) scandal is in some ways a reprise of the Lloyd’s of London “scam”: a hidden insolvency, a “bailout” by naïve, deceived investors with the British Government maintaining tight-lipped silence — and a disaster predictably befalling the investors (and in the case of HBOS the taxpayers too) in due course. It’s perhaps overused, hackneyed, but George Santayana’s comment about repeating an unremembered past fits here.

Another Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition, from 2003, of a Lloyd’s investor has shown up on (PDF). The petition lists $375,000 claimed by Lloyd’s but one would suspect the real amount was higher. Lloyd’s filed a notice of appearance (PDF) in the case.

June 20, 2009: Sundlun (Rhode Island) collection case docket and main documents added. Documents added in Moore case.

April 29, 2009: Judgment in Michalove and Eynon cases added, from

August 22, 2008: Judgment in UNO case (Harris v. Society of Lloyd’s) added.

April 21, 2008: The judgment in the Tropp case has now been posted in html format, together with links to most of the cited cases and (at the bottom of the page) to the docket, from which copies of the most significant court documents can be downloaded. This is the last major collection dispute: Rick Tropp is in the mold of Cary Harrison and Sally Noel, and when we met him a few years ago to discuss access to materials for this page he showed no sign of submitting to Lloyd’s and, perhaps, gave too much credence to the theory that Lloyd’s would resume settlement negotiations with him. He is, at any rate, unlikely to be able to pay the judgment: for that reason alone, bankruptcy might have been a reasonable option for him, especially before the 2005 amendments to the U.S. Bankruptcy Code — or, in the alternative, asset protection measures. The documents in the Tropp file are essential reading for anyone conducting research in the current state of the law on enforcement in the U.S.A. of Lloyd’s English judgments.

January 2008: Various new judgments, mostly on procedural issues, added (see, e.g., Bennett; some news articles added, especially concerning Tropp case; docket and numerous underlying documents and briefs in that case posted.

November 2007: We are informed that those who filed for bankruptcy or who otherwise did not pay their Equitas premiums were originally denied payment of their “return premium” from the Berkshire Hathaway buyout of Equitas. Typically this amounts to less than £2,000. But some of those Lloyd’s investors are now receiving retractions of those letters, and promises of a check after all. It seems that their “discharges” under US bankruptcy law,at least in cases where Lloyd’s never obtained an English judgment against them and never secured a lien on any of their assets takes them outside the scope of any purported assiignment of the return premium to Lloyd’s. See Simon v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp., 153 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 1998) below; holding that a U.S. discharge may under certain circumstances be enforceable extraterritorially. See the documents relating to the BRADY bankruptcy case below, bottom of yellow section.

September 2007: There are several new enforcement-of-judgment cases added, all applying the Uniform Out-of-Country Foreign Money-Judgment Recognition Act. See Sumeril, Lee, Campbell-White (PDF) and Pierce (Bankruptcy docket with links to downloadable documents; of interest because unlike so many other Lloyd’s investors, Pierce seems to have arranged his affairs appropriately over a period of years). It’s a pity that so few American Lloyd’s investors — and, more significantly, their attorneys — have taken advantage of this Web site for legal research. (Whether such failure on the party of the attorney rises to the level of malpractice is not for us to say, but while we do not give legal advice we have nonetheless in effect done much of the legal research for Names, free and gratis. Perhaps people only respect what they have to pay for.) This site is now nearly ten years old and we have been recommending to readers all that time that they engage in asset protection and estate planning within the limits of the laws on fraudulent transfers.

Those U.S. investors who, given their personal situations, were able to file bankruptcy petitions in 1996 and 1997 will now have reached or be approaching the tenth anniversary of filing and the fact of their bankruptcies will be deleted from their credit reports. has begun a new free docket service. This is an alternative to the fee-based federal courts’ PACER for finding cases and it avoids the fees for fruitless PACER searches.

The unreported FORGOSH case (D. Minn.) see below, yellow section, especially the appeal under Docket 06-03858) illustrates the cost of delay, and the risks of “fraudulent coneyance” within the lookback period as well as misrepresentations in a bankruptcy petition

The ROACH case (S.D. Ohio; N.D. Ala.) is another unreported series of Lloyd’s collection cases. One can assume that Lloyd’s dismissal of some of the defendants means that those defendants paid what was demanded of them or exhausted their assets in trying to do so.

Significant matters since 2005:

For reasons made clear in the left-hand column there has been little change since 2005. We continue to monitor the courts and and to update our collection of cases and also to add newsworthy material, but at a much slower pace than before. This Web page was completely re-created in February 2007 using modern “cascading style sheet” Web design. This should enable it to load rapidly in modern browsers.

A few new U.S. cases were added in 2006 (Ellis, Moore, Siemon-Netto …) but none of these furnish new insight into the issues. The Moore case involves allegations by Lloyd’s of fraudulent transfers by the investor-defendant, but the issues are still in arbitration and have yet to be resolved. In principle, the possibility of successfully ring-fencing assets from Lloyd’s should be interesting, but unfortunately the published cases concern investors who left that strategy until too late. (The statute of limitations in the USA for attacking “asset protection” arrangements varies by state: 2, 4, 6 and 7 years.)

Some materials collected in 2005 that may be of interest are:

Society of Lloyd’s v. Fraser — complete list of High Court defendants now in digital (HTML) format — see silver section below

Longtin (execution of judgment) decision added, Dec. 2, 2005

Text of Statutory Instrument 2005-1998 “Insurers (Reorganisation and Winding Up) (Lloyd’s) Regulations 2005” added Nov. 8, 2005. See also related documents, bottom of green section below

Judgment in Lloyd’s v. Lee & Silversmith et al. added August 20. See yellow section below.

Judgment in Borgers case on appeal (9th Circuit, due process issues) added, August 15.

See the Fuerst case and the docket and many important documents, posted July 31. These enforcement-of-judgments cases, resulting in judgments for Lloyd’s in the millions of dollars and court-ordered examination of the debtors in the search for assets and possible fraudulent conveyances, highlight the political nature of the Lloyd’s litigation: as I was told in 1992 by a senior London solicitor, the British Government made the survival of Lloyd’s and its victory in over its investors in the courts a matter of overriding national interest. Never forget: the courts do not exist to “do justice”; they exist to promote (1) their own institutional interest, (2) national stability and (3) more or less the status quo.

Many key Lloyd’s cases have now been annotated with hot links to cases cited by the judge. Internal links are picked up by Google, Yahoo! and other search engines within a few weeks, and you can search effectively within this site (including cases not listed on this page or otherwise indexed on the site) by including the delimiter « » in your search criteria. This site’s library of court judgments is not limited to Lloyd’s cases, although such cases are the only ones indexed here. Others can be found through a Web search. (These include some arcane and subtle issues, such as the cross-border effects of bankruptcy orders, extradition issues and belief in the truth of a statement as a defense to a defamation suit.)

European Parliament makes progress in Lloyd’s case
The European Parliament has received the green light to take the Commission to court over its failure to answer questions about the Lloyd’s of London case, Sir Robert Atkins MEP, deputy leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament and delegation spokesman on the Parliament’s petitions committee, said on June 29. Click here for full story.

Added June 24: decision of Bankruptcy Judge Judith A. Boulden dismissing the Harmsen case (involuntary bankruptcy case brought by Lloyd’s against one of its U.S. investors; also docket and many downloadable documents. This case was affirmed on appeal, 310 B.R. 188 (B.A.P. 10th 2005).

Many cases have been re-formatted and renamed; recent opinions have been hot-linked to references when the cited case is available on this server.

Click on a link to download or to view a selected case report.

Early documents were posted in ASCII *.txt format; later ones in PDF or in Rich Text Format that can be read in MS Word or another word procesor. Recent cases have mostly been posted in HTML as have re-postings of older ones. (In alphabetical order by significant – usually external – party name)

English and other UK Judgments

NOTE: All links to UK cases have been restored as of Feb. 11, 2007. Should you have any problem accessing a document, let us know by .

Lloyd’s litigation case management orders (some of these are repeated below from other sources; these are the versions published from time to time in Times Law Reports) (HTML)
March 11, 1994
August 10, 1995
April 5, 1996
October 8, 1996
November 8, 1996
November 4, 1999
February 11, 2000

Aiken v. Stewart Wrightson Members Agency Ltd, [1995] 1 W.L.R. 1281, [1995] 3 All. E.R. 449
same case, Ct. App., July 16, 1996, [1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 577
Lawtel summary

Aldrich v. Norwich Union Life Ins. Co. Ltd., [1999] EWCA Civ 2042 , [2000] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 1 (C.A. Jul. 30, 1999), Times L. Rep. Aug. 13, 1999 (denying appeals from orders enforcing Norwich Union’s claims against Lloyd’s investors on bank guarantees that had been called by Lloyd’s)
another copy
same, from BAILII server

Aldrich v. Norwich Union Life Ins. Co. Ltd., [1999] EWCA Civ 2042, [1999] Lloyd’s L. Rep. I.R. 453
same, from BAILII server

Arbuthnott v. Fagan, [1996] L.R.L.R. 143 (C.A., June 21, 1994) (discovery granted as to transcripts of testimony given in a Lloyd’s investigation into the horrendous losses suffered by investors in LMX syndicates of the Feltrin agency)

Arbuthnott v. Fagan, Queens Bench Div., transcript, May 23, 1994

Arbuthnott v. Fagan, [1996] L.R.L.R. 135, The Independent 1 October 1993, The Times 20 October 1993 (C.A., June 30, 1993)

Arbuthnott v. Fagan, Queens Bench Div., transcript, May 13, 1993

Arbuthnott v. Feltrim U/W Agencies Ltd, QBD, Comm’l Ct., transcript, Dec. 20,1995

Arbuthnott v. Feltrim U/W Agencies Ltd, Queens Bench Div., transcript, Mar. 10,1995
another copy

Arbuthnott & others v Feltrim Underwriting Agencies Ltd & others, QBD (Transcript), Oct. 27, 1994

Ashmore v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, [1992] 1 W.L.R. 446 (ASCII)
same, [1992] 2 All ER 486

Avon Insurance plc v. Swire Fraser Ltd., Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., Jan. 20, 2000, [2000] L.R.I.R. 535 (stop loss insurers of Lloyd’s investors; claim in damages under the Misrepresentation Act 1967)

Bates v. Barrow, [1995] 1 Lloyd’s L. Rep. 680 (Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct. Dec. 8, 1994) (ASCII) (illegality of certain stop-loss policies issued unauthorised Finnish insurer)

Barrow v. Bankside Members Agency Ltd, [1996] 1 All E.R. 981
another copy: [1996] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 278
Lawtel summary

Barton, Henderson, Rosen etc v Merrett and Ernst & Young Etc, Q.B.D. transcript, Jan. 12, 1993 (claim of breach of contract or duty in closing by managing and members’ agents of the 1983 and 1984 years of account into the respective following years)

Berriman v. Rose Thomson Young (Underwriting) Ltd, Q.B.D. (Comm. Ct.), Mar. 19, 1996, [1996] L.R.L.R. 426 (Bullen held to be an incompetent underwriter, but reinsuring with North Korean reinsurer was not unreasonable; discussion of liability of Members Agents; estoppel (no); limitations; tax offset (no))
Application for costs, Apr. 2, 1996
Application for interim payment, May 23, 1997
Lawtel summary

Body (on behalf of Rose Thomson Young Action Group) v. Society of Lloyd’s, Lawtel 11/7/99, AC8001121

Boobyer v. David Holman & Co. & Society of Lloyd’s (No. 1), [1992] 2 Lloyd’s L. Rep. 436 (whether to transfer proceedings to the Queen’s Bench Div.)
CLI summary of case

Boobyer v. David Holman & Co. & Society of Lloyd’s (No. 2), [1993] 1 Lloyd’s L. Rep. 96 (HTML) (cash calls and deposits)
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Bowman, 2002 EWCA Civ 1886, [2003] All ER (D) 393 (Dec) (statutory demand against Lloyd’s investor)
— Official Transcript

R. v. Lloyd’s of London ex p. Briggs, [1993] Lloyd’s L.Rep. 176 (Q.B.D.) (RTF)
CLI summary of case
Lawtel summary

Brook v. Southall, Ct. App. Civ. Div., (unreported, Apr. 11, 1997) (tax issue: claim by salaried solicitor, Lloyd’s investor, for repayment of tax deductions on account of Lloyd’s losses)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Brooks, 134 N.L.J. 680, Times L. Rep. Mar. 12, 1984, FT Mar. 13, 1984 (Q.B.D. 6 Mar. 1984) , (Lloyd’s disciplinary powers over its members)

Brown v. GIO Insurance Ltd, [1998] C.L.C. 650, [1998] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 201 , Times L. Rep. 18 Feb. 1998 (Ct. App. 1998) (interpretation of LMX reinsurance contracts: Feltrim & Gooda Walker)
Lawtel summary (HTML)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Burningham, Kahm & Gooda, Q.B. Comm’l Ct., 4 Mar. 1998 (No. 1), [1999] 1 FLR 246 (settlement offer not discriminatory)
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. Burningham, Kahn & Gooda, Q.B. Comm’l Ct., 4 Mar. 1998 (No. 2) (RTF) (wife unable to show that she was so unduly influenced by her husband as to vitiate her action in investing in Lloyd’s)
Lawtel summary

C v. C (Financial provision: non-disclosure), [1994] 2 F.L.R. 272, [1994] Fam. Law. 561, [1995] 1 F.C.R. 75 (non-disclosure of Lloyd’s investment in course of divorce)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 579 (Q.B., Comm’l Ct., 5 Jul 1993) (held: fraud no defence to payment of letters of credit by bank at demand of Lloyd’s)
CLI summary of case

R v. Council of the Society of Lloyd’s, ex parte Carpenter, Times L. Rep. Aug. 22, 1984, p. 22 (attempted resignation to avoid disciplinary action) (PDF scan)
Lawtel summary

Carter & Adams v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2005] All E.R. (D) 240 (Jan) (statutory demand)

Charter Reinsurance Co. Ltd. v. Fagan, [1997] A.C. 313 (ASCII)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Clementson (No 3), [1997] L.R.L.R. 175, [1995] 5 Re L.R. 215, [1996] C.L.C. 1590, T.L.R. May 14, 1996 (Q.B.D., Comm. Ct. May 7, 1996)
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Clementson (No 2), QBD, Comm’l Ct, May 7, 1996, LexisUK transcript ; Shorter report as pub. in Times Law Rep., May 14, 1996, p. 41 (“Lloyd’s bylaw does not infringe EU competition law”) (PDF scan)
another copy
Lawtel summary

same case, Clementson No. 2, full text (103 pp.), Society of Lloyd’s v. Clementson, [1997] E.C.C. 193 (QBD 7 May 1996) (ASCII), Times Law Rep., May 14, 1996 (contains extensive explanatory material and testimony)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Clementson (No. 2), [1996] C.L.C. 1205 (Ct. App., Feb. 21, 1996), Times L. Rep. Feb. 29, 1996
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Clementson (No. 1), Times L. Rep., Jan. 11, 1994 (Q.B.D., Dec. 16, 1993)
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Clementson (No. 1), [1995] L.R.L.R. 307 (Ct. App. 1994) (preliminary issues; implied terms)
CLI summary of case

Cohen v. David Holman & Co Ltd, [1996] L.R.L.R. 387 (Q.B. (Comm’l Ct., June 28, 1996) (arbitration proceeding: Lloyd’s investor who had brought arbitration proceeding against his Members’ Agent was entitled to a hearing berore decision as a matter of natural justice)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Colfox, [1998] Lloyd’s L. Rep. IR 186 (Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., July 31,1997)(also listed as Manning v. Society of Lloyd’s – see below)
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. Cook, (unreported), Sept. 16, 1999, 1999 WL 807182 (insolvency; conflicting claims by Lloyd’s and Inland Revenue; Master’s discretion in preserving Name’s counterclaim against Lloyd’s)

Cox v. Bankside Members Agency Ltd, [1995] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 437 (C.A. Apr. 25, 1995), (Ruling regarding disposition of Members Agent’s Errors & Omissions insurance proceeds to Names: not to be apportioned ratably but on first come, first served basis)

R. v. Society of Lloyd’s ex p. Cuthbert Heath U/W Ltd., [1998] EWHC Admin 415 (7 Apr. 1998) (judicial review, Lloyd’s disciplinary proceeding)
same, from BAILII server

Society of Lloyd’s v. Daly, Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., 27 Jan. 1998
Lawtel summary

Daly v. Lime Street U/W Agencies Ltd, Q.B.D., [1987] 2 F.T.L.R. 277, [1987] Fin. L.R. 331, Times L.R.June 8, 1987, 1987 WL 491642, (Transcript:Hemingway)

Davies v. Norwich Union, C.A., Nov. 4, 1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1673, on appeal from Ch. D, issue of spousal rights in matrimonial home
same, from BAILII server
Lawtel summary

Re a Debtor No. 544/SD/98, [2000] 1 BCLC 103 Times L.R. June 18, 1999 (Chancery Div.) (also reported as G. v. Society of Lloyd’s and Garrow v. Society of Lloyd’s (see below)) (application to set aside statutory demand by Lloyd’s so as to pursue counterclaim)
same case below, Chancery Division

Mem Deeny and others (whom only Colfox remains) v Littlejohn & Co and others, Ct. App., Apr. 5, 2000

Deeny v. Gooda Walker Ltd., QBD, Comm’l Ct., Apr. 6, 1995, [1995] 1 W.L.R. 1206, [1995] 4 All E.R. 289

Deeny v. Gooda Walker Ltd (in liquidation) (No 2), Inland Revenue Commissioners, Third Party, (H.L., Mar. 7-8, 1996), [1996] 1 All E.R. 933, [1996] 1 W.L.R. 426, Times Law Rep. March 8, 1996

Deeny v. Gooda Walker Ltd. (in vol. liq.), Inland Revenue Comm’rs third party, Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., Jan. 11, 1995, [1995] S.T.C. 439, 68 Tax Cas. 458

Deeny v. Gooda Walker Ltd., H.C., transcript of hearing before Mr Justice Colman, Jan. 17, 1997 (ASCII)

Deeny v. Gooda Walker Ltd, QBD, Comm’l Ct., Oct. 4, 1994, [1996] LRLR 183, The Times 7 Oct. 1994, The Independent Oct. 5, 1994

Deeny v. Gooda Walker Ltd, Ct. App., Dec. 13, 1993, The Independent, Dec. 14, 1993

Deeny v. Littlejohn & Co., Q.B.D., 2 Feb. 1995, “Lloyd’s litigation – case management – future cases”, Times L. Rep. 23 Feb. 1995 (All Lloyd’s litigation cases must now be commenced in QBD Commercial List.
Lawtel summary (HTML)

Deeny v. Littlejohn & Co., Chancery Div., Hearing, Dec. 7, 1994, Times L. Rep., Jan. 19, 1995 (time and distance policies)

Doll-Steinberg v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2002] EWHC Admin. 419 (19 Mar. 2002) (refusing judicial review to Gerda Doll-Steinberg on the Lloyd’s settlement offer)
same, from BAILII server

Drummond v. FLP Secretan & Co., Q.B.D., 25 Oct. 1996 (request for adjournment pending announcement of details of settlement initiative; granted to October 1997)

Royal Bank of Scotland v. Etridge, [2001] UKHL 44, (H.L. 11 Oct. 2001) (RTF)
from Stationery Office server
Lawtel summary

F v. F, Fam. Div., Jan. 12, 1996, The Independent, Feb. 26, 1996 (divorce action; husband has substantial Lloyd’s losses; discussion of Equitas)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Frasernotice of application for summary judgment, Aug. 20, 1997
same, scanned copy of original court document (775k) (includes list of all High Court defendants, useful for researchers seeking further case documentation)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Fraser, Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., 3 Nov. 1997 (“directions for finally disposing of the names’ cases”)
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. Fraser, [1998] EWCA Civ 1378, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 156, [1998] C.L.C. 1630, 1998 WL 1043675 (Ct. App. July 31, 1998) (quantum)
same, from LexisUK
same, RTF format
same, All England Reports/Smith Bernal transcript
same, BAILII server
same, scanned copy of original judgment
Lawtel summary (HTML)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Fraser, Court of Appeal, [1998] EWCA 3379 (ASCII) (transcript of hearing; 12 applications for leave to appeal from the Commercial Court; leave refused) (was: fras9807.txt; case report missing)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Fraser, QBD Comm’l Ct, Tuckey, J. Judgment of Mar. 4, 1998 (Equitas premium claim against non-accepting Lloyd’s investors; Lloyd’s bylaws enforceable)
same, original court typescript
Lawtel summary
case comment by Simon Cooper

Garrow v. Society of Lloyd’s, Ch. Div. (Bankruptcy Court) June 10, 1999, Times L.Rep., June 18, 1999 (Lloyd’s may not bankrupt judgment debtor investor in England pending outcome of fraud trial) (also listed as In re A Debtor, No. 544/SD/98)
same, All England Reports transcript
CLI summary of case

Garrow v. Society of Lloyd’s, Times L. Rep. Oct. 28, 1999, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 38, [2000] C.L.C. 241, [2000] 1 B.C.L.C. 103 (HTML)
— another copy, Smith Bernal transcript, Court of Appeal decision, Oct. 13, 1999
Ct. App., 13 Oct. 1999, (1,133k)
CLI summary of case (HTML)
Lawtel summary

Greystoke v. Lloyd’s of London Ct. App. 4 Mar. 1998 (RTF) (pro se application to appeal out of time granted)

Hallam-Eames v. Merrett Syndicates Ltd., [2001] Lloyd’s Rep PN 178, The Times 25 January 1995, The Independent 25 January 1995, [1995] C.L.C. 173
— same case in court below, QBD, Oct. 14, 1994

Harris v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2008] EWHC 1433 (Comm), 2008 WL 2465694, Comm’l Court, July 1, 2008 (United Names Organisation case)

State Bank of New South Wales v. Harrison, 2002 EWCA Civ 363 (Ct. App. 2002)
Lawtel summary

Henderson v. Merrett Syndicates Ltd. (H.L., Jul. 25, 1994), [1994] 3 AER 506

Henderson v. Merrett Syndicates Ltd., [1995] 2 A.C. 145 (H.L., July 25, 1994)

Henderson v. Merrett Syndicates Ltd., Q.B.D., 31 Oct. 1995, [1997] L.R.L.R. 265 (RTF, 258 pages in original) (Incompetent underwriting; asbestos)

Henderson v. Merrett Syndicates Ltd., Q.B.D. transcript, 21 Feb. 1996

Society of Lloyd’s v. Henderson, [2005] EWHC 850 (Comm), [2005] All ER (D) 155 (May) (UNO case; applications time-barred and/or have no prosect of success)
Same case, on appeal, [2007] All ER (D) 446 (Jul) (affirmed)

Marchant and Eliot Underwriting Ltd v. Higgins, Times Law Rep., Jan. 12, 1996 (pay now, sue later clause held enforceable)
Lawtel summary

same, Marchant and Eliot Underwriting Ltd v. Higgins, [1997] E.C.C. 11, [1996] 3 C.M.L.R. 313, [1996] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 313 (Q.B.D. Oct. 24, 1995) (full text, 29 pp.), (ASCII)

same case, affirmed on appeal, Marchant and Eliot Underwriting Ltd v. Higgins, [1997] E.C.C. 47, [1996] 3 C.M.L.R. 349, [1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 21 (Q.B.D. 21 Dec. 1995) (11 pp.) (ASCII)

another copy, styled as Higgins v. Marchant & Eliot Underwriting Limited, Dec. 21, 1995, captured PDF file, from the Court typescript

Hiscox v. Outhwaite (H.L.), [1992] 1 A.C. 562

same case, Court of Appeal, Feb. 25, 1991, [1991] 2 Lloyd’s L. Rep. 1

same, Hiscox v. Outhwaite (No. 2), Ct. App., Mar. 25, 1991, [1991] 3 All ER 143, [1991] 1 W.L.R. 545, [1991] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 553

same, Hiscox v. Outhwaite (No. 3), QBD, Comm’l Ct., May 24, 1991, [1991] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 524

Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v. Holmes, 1999 S.L.T. 563, [1999] S.C.L.R. 297 (Outer House, 6 Jan. 1999) (bank seeking repayment from Lloyd’s investor for payment under bank guarantee to Lloyd’s; attempted defense of fraud fails)

Society of Lloyd’s v Hummel, 2000 WL 544204, No. 1316 of 1998, Commercial Court, March 20, 2000

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, [1999] 1 All E.R. (Comm.) 354 (refusal to stay investors’ fraud action against Lloyd’s)
High Court, Notice to non-accepting names (archived copy, RTF)
— Jaffray Litigation,
Jaffray v. Society of Lloyds, Lloyd’s litigation case management note re: Names wishing to advance fraud allegations, Times Law Rep., Nov. 4, 1999 (ASCII)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, QBD, Comm’l Ct., Jan. 22, 1999, [1999] 1 All E.R. (Comm.) 354
another copy

Petersen Int’l Underwriters, Inc. “Communicator Briefing” (self-serving statement by Calif. firm re above case)

CLI summary of case

Lawtel summary (Application by Lloyd’s for stay of both claims and counterclaims brought by Lloyd’s Names alleging fraud against Lloyd’s was refused. There was no needless procedural duplication of earlier litigation.)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray (No. 2), Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., Transcript Jan. 25, 2000 (LEXIS)
same, [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 181
Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray (No. 2), Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., Transcript Jan. 26, 2000 (LEXIS) (costs sharing order)
same, Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray (No. 3), [2000] All ER (D) 418
same, [2000] EWHC Com 174, from BAILII server
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, Comm’l Ct., Cost sharing order, June 9, 2000, [2000] 2 All E.R. (Comm) 181, [2000] C.L.C. 725, 2000 WL 824046

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct. 9 June 2000, unreported (evidentiary, witness issues)
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. Sir William Otho Jaffray Bt, [2000] EWHC Commercial 51 (Nov. 3, 2000) (archived copy of court server file in PDF format, 411 pages)
RTF version
same, from BAILLI server

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, QBD, Comm’l Ct., Nov. 3, 2000, Lexis, Transcript (lengthy, 200+ pp.) (Deceit – Misrepresentation – Ingredients of tort of deceit – Lloyd’s litigation – Names alleging Lloyd’s knowingly or recklessly making untrue representations – Whether tort of deceit established)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, QBD, Comm’l Ct., June 9, 2000, Times L. Rep., Aug. 3, 2000 (Evidence – party serving witness statement – court cannot order him to call witness)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray (No. 2), QBD, Comm’l Ct., Jan. 25, 2000 (Transcript)

Statement by Cresswell, J., 3 Feb. 2000 (formerly on court server) — archived copy

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, [2001] EWCA Civ 1503 (Ct. App.on issue of confidentiality in civil disclosure motion, London Market Claims Services & Equitas)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, Ct. App., Civ. Div., Oct. 8, 2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1503

Society of Lloyd’s v. Jaffray, Witness statements before Court of Appeal, Feb. 21, 2002, 2002 WL 237062

Jaffray v. Society of Lloyd’s, Ct.App. July 26, 2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1101 (Westlaw UK, Daily Tel. Oct. 3, 2002)
Another copy, 2002 WL 1654876
same, as RTF file (see directly below for full text of judgment)
CLI summary of case

Jaffray v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2002] E.W.C.A.Civ. 1101, same, from BAILII server
Lawtel summary

Jaffray v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2007] EWCA Civ 586, [2007] All ER (D) 213 (Jun) (Applicants seek, under the jurisprudence of Taylor v Lawrence [2002] EWCA Civ 90, [2003] QB 528, [2002] 2 All ER 353, to reopen the decision of the court in this case [2002] EWCA Civ 1101. Denied.)

Johnson v. Society of Lloyd’s, QBD (Comm’l Ct.), July 22, 2002, [2002] EWHC 1512 (Comm), [2002] All E.R. (D) 315 (Jul) Electronic Telegraph, Aug. 12, 2002 (Lloyd’s investor’s unaccepted counter-offer did not make him an R&R settlement “accepting Name”)
CLI summary of case
Lawtel summary

Jones v. Society of Lloyd’s, Ch.D. 16 Dec. 1999: u/w members who did not pay their R&R aswsessment by fixed deadline were liable for full liabilities even if they signed relevant agreement (Lawtel: summary of judgment)
CLI summary of case
Lawtel summary

Jones v. Society of Lloyd’s, Times L. Rep., Feb. 2, 2000 (withdrawal of debt credits by Lloyd’s for investors accepting the R&R settlement offer who did not pay by 30 Sept. 1996 was not an unconscionable penalty)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Kahn, [1998] 3 F.C.R. 93, [1999] 1 F.L.R. 246, [1999] Fam. Law 92 (Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct. 4 Mar. 1998) (husband absconded to Pakistan leaving wife with Lloyd’s debts; held undue influence defence unavailable)
CLI summary of case

Blackburn (Inspector of Taxes) v. Keeling, 2003 E.W.C.A. Civ. 1221 (allowance of antcipated Lloyd’s losses of £425,390 in Lloyd’s investor’s tax coding)
same, full text as read in court
same, from court server

Kelley v. Society of Lloyd’s, 2000 WL 1027169 (Bankruptcy, Jan. 27, 2000)

C Inc plc v L and another, [2001] All ER (D) 376 (Mar), QBD Comm’l Ct, 16 Mar. 16, 2001 (freezing order [Mareva injunction] against Guernsey assets of Lloyd’s investor’s husband; defaulting subscriber to corporate member of Lloyd’s; claim that assets of Lloyd’s investor wife are held by her in trust for husband)

Agnew v. Länsförsäkringsbolagens A.B., H.L. Feb. 17, 2000 (Lugano convention)
same, RTF version

Board of Inland Revenue v. Laurence Philipps & Co. (Insurance), Ltd., [1947] 80 Lloyd’s L.Rep. 549 (K.B., 19 May 1947) (older tax case — for purposes of excess profits tax underwriters’ loans must treated as capital — sheds some light on why, when Britain had very high income tax rates, Lloyd’s investment was attractive to high earners)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Laws, [2003] EWHC 873, [2003] All ER (D) 349 (Apr), 2003 WL 1822990 (rejection of investors’ arguments regarding violation of European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms)
same, from BAILII server

Society of Lloyd’s v. Laws, [2003] EWCA Civ 1887, [2003] All ER (D) 392 (Dec), Ct. App. Dec. 19, 2003

Society of Lloyd’s v. Laws, [2004] EWHC 71 (Comm), [2004] All ER (D) 277 (Jan), QBD Comm’l Ct, Jan. 28, 2004
— same, All ER transcript

Society of Lloyd’s v. Levy & Johnson, [2004] EWHC 1860 (Comm.), [2004] All E.R. (D) 566 (Jul) (Equitas premium and European law issues)
same case, BAILII server

Lloyd’s litigation: Report on progress and management by M. Justice Cresswell, Times L. Rep. 5 Apr. 1996

Lloyd’s litigation: Outstanding cases, Times Law Rep., Oct. 8, 1996

Lloyd’s litigation: Outstanding cases (No 2), Times Law Rep, Nov. 8, 1996

Lloyd’s litigation: Merrett, Gooda Walker & Feltrim cases, [1994] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 193

In re Lloyd’s Premiums Trust Deeds in the Outhwaite proceedings, [1996] EWCA Civ 796 (24th October, 1996)
same, from BAILII server

Society of Lloyds v Longtin, [2005] EWHC 2491 (Comm), [2005] All ER (D) 142 (Nov) (collection case; judgment debtor had been abroad; Lloyd’s could enforce judgment more than six years after issuance)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Lyon, Leighs & Wilkinson, Queens Bench Div., Feb. 20, 1997, [1997] C.L.C. 759, 1997 WL 1104338 (abstract), aff’d by: Society of Lloyd’s v. Lyon & ors., [1997] C.L.C. 1398; [1997] 6 Re. L.R. 289; Times, Aug. 11, 1997; The Independent, Oct. 6, 1997 (C.S.) (CA) (see below) Held: Names must pay the Equitas premium

Society of Lloyd’s v. Lyon, Leighs & Wilkinson (No. 2), High Court, London, Apr. 23, 1997
scanned typescript of Judgment as read in court (829 kb)
same, from BAILII server
CLI summary of case
scanned typescript of defendants’ skeleton argument in Order 14 proceeding (added Dec. 5, 2004)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Lyon, Leighs & Wilkinson (Canadian Names, intervenors), C.A., Jul. 31, 1997, Times L.R. 11 Aug. 1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2283, [1997] C.L.C. 1398
Full text of Court of Appeal decision
same, from LexisUK
same, [1997] EWCA Civ 2283, from BAILII server
Lawtel summary (HTML)

R v Board of Inland Revenue, ex parte MFK Underwriting Agencies Ltd, [1990] 1 W.L.R. 1545, [1990] 1 All E.R. 91 (tax case)

McAllister (A Debtor) v. Society of Lloyd’s, Nos 4449 & 4450 of 1998, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 487, [1999] 1 All E.R. (Comm) 149; [1999] B.P.I.R. 548 (Lloyd’s hardship scheme; acceptance of settlement terms; bank delay; statutory demand set aside)
CLI summary of case
Lawtel summary

McBride v. Blackburn (Inspector of Taxes), [2003] S.T.C. (SCD) 139 (action group chairman’s “success fee” is taxable emolument

Regina v Chairman of the Regulatory Board of Lloyd’s Ltd, Ex parte Macmillan and Another, Times L. Rep., Dec. 14, 1994 (Practice – loss review – assessing risk of prejudice to litigation)

Mann v Coutts & Co, [2003] EWHC 2138 (“defendant owed no duty of care to the claimants as potential subscribers to the second authority in relation to the decision to subscribe nor to disclose the existence of the ‘sweeper’ arrangement”)
same, as read in court

Manning v. Society of Lloyd’s, [1998] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 186 (Q.B. Div. Comm’l Ct. July 31, 1997) (Colfox, Phillips & others; Lloyd’s seeks summary judgment and declaration that Names do not benefit from the settlement agreement)
another copy

Moran v. Lloyd’s, C.A., [1983] Q.B. 542 (Lloyd’s disciplinary procedure, enforcement)
same, [1983] 2 All ER 200

Society of Lloyd’s v. Morris, Ct. App. Civ. Div., May 28, 1993, transcript, Larking (Lexis)
same case below, QBD, Comm’l Ct., Mar. 15, 1993, transcript, Lexis (diversion of investors’ stop loss policy proceeds to Lloyd’s)
CLI summary of case
Lawtel summary

Napier v. Hunter, [1993] A.C. 713 (H.L.) (application of investors’ stoploss insurance proceeds)

Napier v. Kershaw, Queen’s Bench Div., transcript, June 12, 1992

Lord Napier and Ettrick v RF Kershaw Ltd; Society of Lloyd’s v. Woodard, Ct. App. Oct. 24, 1996, Times L. Rep. 7 Nov. 1996, [1997] L.R.L.R. 1, [1996] C.L.C. 1875
Lawtel summary

Lord Napier and Ettrick v RF Kershaw Ltd (No.2), reported as Society of Lloyd’s v. Robinson, H.L. Mar. 25, 1999, [1999] 1 W.L.R. 756; [1999] 1 All E.R. (Comm) 545 ([1999] C.L.C. 987, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 329, (1999) 96 (22) L.S.G. 34, (1999) 143 S.J.L.B. 150, Times, March 29, 1999)
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Noel, Ct. App., June 30, 2002, Transcript (Smith Bernal)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Noel, [2002] EWCA Civ. 937 (Ct. App. June 20, 2002)

(“It probably does nobody any good to express sympathy, but Mrs Noel and others who are present in this court should know full well that it is not because the court does not have sympathy with the appalling losses that Names suffered. At the end of the day, this court has to look at the position in law. The position in law, as I see it, is absolutely clear. It follows that to give Mrs Noel permission to appeal and allow her a further day in court in which Lloyd’s would be represented, would be doing her no service whatever. She would simply be liable for the costs that would be incurred and it would therefore do her no favours at all. There being no reasonable prospects of success on this appeal, her application for permission must be refused.”)

another copy

Scanned copy of May 4, 2005 affidavit of Edward Cowan’s witness statement on behalf of Sally Noel (6 pp., 976 kb.)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Noel, [2002] EWHC (Comm) QBD Comm’l Ct., Mar. 27, 2002 (Sally Noel’s points by way of defence have no real prospect of success against Lloyd’s claims against her; Court has no power to order an investigation into Lloyd’s alleged fraud)
same, [2002] All ER (D) 438 (Mar)
— Sally Noel’s data packet (PDF, 17 pages, 5.72 mb)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Noel, [2001] E.W.C.A. Civ. 521 (Ct. App., Mar. 30, 2001) (appeal by Lloyd’s investor against claim by Lloyd’s for Equitas reinsurance premium unilaterally imposed; appeal allowed) (“By the success of this appeal Mrs. Noel lives to fight another day. Rather, however, than fight it she would almost certainly be better advised to settle.”) (Investor had not signed a new form of undertaking under the 1982 Lloyd’s Act.)
same, [2001] All ER (D) 371 (Mar)
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. Noel, Ct. App., Mar. 31, 2000, transcript (Smith Bernal)

Nutting v. Baldwin, 1995] 2 All E.R. 321, [1995] 1 W.L.R. 201 Ch. Div., Nov. 18, 1994 (Contract – Penalty – Forfeiture provision – Association formed to finance prosecution of claims – Association rules providing that any member failing to pay additional subscriptions disentitled to share in recoveries – Rule constituting forfeiture provision – Whether rules amounting to penalty clause – Whether equitable relief available)

PCW Syndicates v. PCW Insurers, C.A., July 31, 1995, Times L. Rep. 10 Oct. 1995, [1996] 1 All E.R. 774, [1996] 1 W.L.R. 1136, [1995] C.L.C. 1517
Lawtel summary

Peterson v. De Brunner (Inspector of Taxes), Special Comm’rs Decision, Dec. 19, 1995, [1996] S.T.C. (SCD) 91 (calculation of tax relief on Lloyd’s losses in early years of underwriting)

Phillips v. Society of Lloyd’s, Times L. Rep. May 9, 1997 (Directions relating to the date for commencement of proceedings arising out of a dispute as to acceptance by Lloyd’s names of its reconstruction and renewal package.)
Lawtel summary

Phillips v. Society of Lloyd’s case management, Q.B.D. Comm. Ct., Apr. 18, 1997
CLI summary of case

Poole v. HM Treasury, [2006] EWHC 2731 (Comm), [2007] 1 All ER (Comm) 255, [2007] Lloyds Rep IR 114 (European-law issues; (non-)liability of British Government for alleged non-implementation of European directive)
official version, BAILII
same case, Court of Appeal, Civil Div. Daily Telegraph Law Reports version, Oct. 24, 2007
official version, BAILII, [2007] EWCA Civ 1021

Price v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 453 (Q.B. Div. 22 Oct. 1999) (ASCII) (Equitas premium double counting and mental harassment by Lloyd’s alleged.)
same, Q.B.D., Oct. 22, 1999, transcript (negligence, duty of care issues)
scanned copy of original judgment
another copy, RTF format (Lawtel summary, QBD 22 Oct. 1999)
CLI summary of case
Lawtel summary

Edwards-Roberts v. Price, Ct. App. Oct. 18, 1999, transcript (Smith-Bernal) (claim of negligence against accountants)
another copy

Norwich Union Life Ins. Co. v. Qureshi, Ct. App. July 30, 1999, [1998] C.L.C. 1605 (An insurer’s duty of disclosure did not go beyond facts which were material to the insurance contract. Leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused.)
Lawtel summary

Norwich Union Life Ins. Co. v. Qureshi, Q.B.D., Comm’lk Ct., June 8, 1998, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 263
same, All England Reports transcript

Rew v. Cox, Q.B.D. 20 Oct. 1995, (1996) CLC 472 (Grounds for refusing a stay of legal proceeding notwithstanding prior agreement between the parties to arbitrate.)
Lawtel summary

Roberts v. Ludlow Justices, Q.B.D. Crown Office List, CO/1573/91 (unreported, July 16, 1993) (spouse of Lloyd’s debtor convicted of obtaining property by deception; imprisonment and fine; unable to pay)

Roberts v. Price, Ct. App. Civ. Div., (unreported, Feb. 25, 2000) (Lloyd’s investor suing accountants for failure to advise in timely manner on tax position)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Robinson, H of L, [1999] 1 W.L.R. 756, [1999] 1 All ER (Comm) 545 (Mar. 25, 1999)
from BAILII server
another copy (ASCII)
Lawtel summary

Robinson v. Society of Lloyd’s, Comm’l Court, Jan. 26, 2001, Elect. Telegraph, Issue 2111, Mar. 6, 2001 (ASCII) (Claim by applicant for a declaration that he was not an “accepting party” to R&R settlement agreement dismissed)

Russell v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1988] 1 W.L.R. 834; [1988] 2 All E.R. 405; [1988] S.T.C. 195; (1988) 132 S.J. 659; 1988 WL 623441 (Ch. D.) (statutory interpretation; deed of variation; reserve funds at Lloyd’s; capital transfer tax, estate of deceased Lloyd’s member)

Schuldenfrei v. Hilton (Inspector of Taxes), Ch. D., Feb. 10, 1998, [1998] S.T.C. 404 (lloyd’s investor’s tax issues)

Sheldon and others v R H M Outhwaite (Underwriting Agencies) Ltd., [1996] A.C. 102
same, in Court of Appeal, June 30, 1994, [1994] 4 All ER 481, [1994] 3 W.L.R. 999, 43 Con LR 56
same, in Queen’s Bench, [1994] 1 W.L.R. 754

Silver v. Inspector of Taxes, [1997] S.T.C. (SCD) 193 (tax issues of Lloyd’s investor)

Simner v. New India Assurance Co., Ltd. [1995] LRLR 240 (stop-loss insurance issues)

Sphere Drake Insurance Ltd v. Euro Int’l Underwriting Ltd., [2003] E.W.H.C. 1636 (Comm.), Times L.Rep. Aug. 11, 2003 (misrepresentation & fraud – nondisclosure)
same, from BAILII server

Supperstone v. Lloyds [sic] Names Assn. Working Party (In re Stockwell), Ch. Div., unreported, June 15, 1999 (insolvency proceeding of Christopher Derek Stockwell; payments received by the second respondent after his bankruptcy constituted income and not after-acquired property)
Lawtel summary

Stockwell & Ors. v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2007] EWCA Civ. 930, Court of Appeal, July 27, 2007

Stone and another v Chataway (In re Yorke), Ch. Div., [1997] 4 All E.R. 907 (retention of assets by executor of Lloyd’s investor) See June 19, 2001 discussion of this issue on the Trusts Discussion Forum, and see In re Diplock, [1948] Ch. 465 (C.A.). and H.M. Court Service Practice Directions.

Society of Lloyd’s v. Surman & ors., [2004] All E.R. (D) 157 (Oct.) (refusal of stay of charging orders)
Same party, docket, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Fla. 2001

Thomas v. Thomas, [1995] 2 F.L.R. 668, [1995] Fam. Law 672, [1996] 2 F.C.R. 544 (Lloyd’s losses; divorce)

Thomas-Everard v. Society of Lloyd’s, [2003] EWHC 1890 (Ch), Ch.D. July 18, 2002, Times L. Rep. 28 Aug. 2003, (Insolvency procedure: application to set aside statutory demands under r.6.5(4)(a) Insolvency Rules 1986 SI 1986/1925)
same, in ASCII format
same, [2003] EWHC 1890 (Ch), [2003] BPIR 1286
CLI summary of case
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. Tropp (AUA-9), [2004] EWHC 33 (Comm) (Jan. 20, 2004) (AUA-9 [appointed run-off managing agency] issues)
same, [2004] All ER (D) 149 (Jan)
same, full text as read in court
—  Official Transcript
—For copies of all the English judgments relating to Richard A. Tropp (PDF format) see Docket list
See also Tropp case, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, yellow section, below

Society of Lloyd’s v. Twinn, [2000] EWHC Admin 308, Ch.D., Mar. 23, 2000 (statutory demands)
same, from BAILII server

Society of Lloyd’s v. Twinn, Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2000, Times L. Rep. Apr. 4 , 2000 (Contract – whether offer is accepted while seeking indulgence)
Lawtel summary

Re Vos; Dick v., Kendall Freeman, [2006] B.P.I.R. 348, Chancery Div., Aug. 3, 2005 (Insolvent estate; disgorgement of executor’s commissions following petition in insolvency by Lloyd’s)

Wakefield v. Outhwaite, QBD, Comm’l Ct., May 1, 1990, [1990] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 157

Society of Lloyd’s v. Waters, [2001] B.P.I.R. 698 (Ch. D. 2000), (bankruptcy, cross-claim, sufficiency of ev idence; applicant made bankrupt on petition of Lloyd’s; appeal seeking annulment of bankruptcy pending outcome of Lloyd’s fraud litigation denied.)
CLI summary of case

Society of Lloyd’s v. West, Q.B.D. Comm’l Ct., Nov. 24, 1997, unreported (dismissal of motion to set aside service as irregular) (see also California case, same parties, below in yellow section)

R (on the application of West) v. Lloyd’s of London, Ct. App. Civ. Div., Apr. 27, 2004, [2004] EWCA Civ 506, [2004] All ER (D) 270 (Lloyd’s investor not entitled to judicial review of matters related to Lloyd’s [self-] regulation)
same as, [2004] 3 All ER 251
transcript, (from All England Reports), [2004] EWCA Civ 506
same, from court server commentary on case

Society of Lloyd’s v. White, 144 S.J.L.B. 190 (Q.B. Div. Comm’l Ct. 3 Mar. 2000)
Lawtel summary

Society of Lloyd’s v. White (No. 2), [2002] I.L.P.r. 11 (Q.B.D., Comm. Ct.)
CLI summary of case

Wiliams v. Society of Lloyd’s (Re a Debtor, No. 105 of 2000) Bankruptcy, Jan. 11, 2000

Society of Lloyd’s v. Woodard, Ch. D. May 17, 1996, Times L. Rep. May 24, 1996 (validity of amendment of trust deeds by Lloyd’s)
Lawtel summary
CLI summary of case

P & B (Run-Off) Ltd. v Woolley, [2002] EWCA Civ 65 (Feb. 7, 2002) (cash calls on 1993 open year of aviation syndicate)
another copy

Wynniatt-Hussey v. R. J. Bromley Underwriting Agencies Plc, Q.B.D., Apr. 16, 1996 [1996] L.R.L.R. 310, (Q.B.D. Apr. 16, 1996) (preliminary rulings in claims by Names against managing and members’ agents)
Lawtel summary

In re Yorke’s Estate, Ch. D. 8 July 1997, Times L.Rep. Aug. 11, 1997, [1997] 4 All E.R. 907 (executors of the will of a deceased ‘name’ at Lloyds obtained leave to distribute the residue of the estate)
Lawtel summary
See June 19, 2001 discussion of this issue on the Trusts Discussion Forum, and see In re Diplock, [1948] Ch. 465 (C.A.) and
H.M. Court Service Practice Directions.

Young v. Robson Rhodes, [1999] 3 All E.R. 524, Ch. D. Mar. 30, 1999 (Accounting firm’s duty of confidentiality to Lloyd’s synidcate and conflict of interest in merger)
Lawtel summary

Irish Judgments

In the matter of the European Communities (Civil and Commercial Judgments) Regulations 2002: The Society of Lloyd’s v James Monaghan, [2004] IEHC 113, [2003 14FJ], [2004] 1 IR 478, High Court, Mar. 10, 2004 (Allowing an appeal in the matter of the enforcement of an English judgment in favor of Lloyd’s)

Click HERE for Bankruptcy and Fraudulent Conveyance cases and materials – Bankruptcy Page links updated Sept. 21, 2003 – Click HERE for statutes and Lloyd’s administrative documents
(The page of statutes and documents has not been updated since 2000 and may be unavailable; it will be repaired ASAP; most materials will have to be re-scanned; see Lloyds Bye-Laws link elsewhere on this page)  

United States Judgments

(includes some U.S. Bankruptcy Court decisions)

In re Society of Lloyd’s Enforcement of Judgment Litigation, 321 F. Supp. 2d 1381, Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, June 15, 2004

Society of Lloyd’s v. Abramson, 2004 WL 690878 , 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16092 (U.S.D.C., N.D. Tex. Mar. 29, 2004) (enforcement of judgment case)

Allen v. Lloyd’s of London, 94 F.3d 923 (4th Cir. 1996)
same, from
same case below, in District Court, 1996 WL 490177 (E.D. Va.), reversed by above
Submission by British Government in Allen case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Anderson. 2004 WL 905618 , 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7351 (U.S.D.C., N.D. Tex. Apr. 27, 2004) (enforcement of judgment case)
— same, 2004 WL 1243220 (N.D. Tex. June 4, 2004) (supplemental findings and recommendations)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Anderson, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12380 (U.S.D.C. N.D. Tex. July 1, 2004)

Anthoine v. Lord, Bissell & Brook (suit by Lloyd’s investors against New York law firm: asbestos-related fraud claims; dismissed)
284 A.D.2d 233, 726 N.Y.S.2d 553, 2001 N.Y. Slip Op. 05641 (First Dep’t, June 21, 2001)
97 N.Y.2d 607, 764 N.E.2d 394, 738 N.Y.S.2d 290 (Dec. 20, 2001)
295 A.D.2d 293, 744 N.Y.S.2d 666, 2002 N.Y. Slip Op. 05403 (June 27, 2002)
Discussion, Class Action Reporter, Friday, December 10, 1999, Vol. 1, No. 218
same, from server
press release on case

Society of Lloyd’s v. Ashenden, 1999 WL 284775 (N.D. Ill) (enforcement of English judgment by federal district court in Illinois)
copy of District Court docket, N.D. Ill.
same case affirmed on appeal, 233 F.3d 473 (7th Cir. 2000)
New York Law Journal article on the Ashenden and Grace Circuit Courts of Appeal judgments, June 25, 2001

Society of Lloyd’s v. Baker, 673 A.2d 1336 (Me. 1996) (enforcement of English judgment; case reported to have been substantially undefended with the understanding that Lloyd’s would not seek to collect this judgment)
Same case in trial court below, 1995 Me. Super. LEXIS 144

Baker v. LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae, 105 F.3d 1102 (6th Cir. (Ohio) 1997) (Lloyd’s law firm could not claim benefit of forum selection clause in investment contracts; case reportedly was later settled on secret terms)
American Federal Tax Reports version, 79 A.F.T.R.2d 97-1296
same case, from
same case, court below: 1993 WL 662352 (U.S. District Court, S.D. Ohio)
There was an ANA-sponsored group action against LeBoeuf, Lamb that settled in 2004; each Lloyd’s-investor plaintiff reportedly received up to $50,000.

State ex rel. Barclays Bank PLC v. Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, Ohio, 660 N.E.2d 458 (S.Ct. Ohio 1997) (action to enjoin payment under a letter of credit must include the beneficiary, Lloyd’s, as a party)

Beauzay v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 1995 WL 129240 (N.D.Cal.)
— later proceeding, 1995 WL 419736 (denying relief from FRCP Rule 41(a)(1) two-dismissal bar).
— Docket in above Case # 94-CV-20859

Society of Lloyd’s v. Bennett, 2004 WL 1368354, 2004 Utah App. LEXIS 122, 2004 UT App 122, Utah App., Apr. 22, 2004 (dismissal for untimely notice of appeal)
same case, from court server

Society of Lloyd’s v. Bennett et al., D.C. D. Utah, Mar. 18, 2003, Lloyd’s enforcement of English judgments
Court docket, with links to all available case documents
—  Certiorari denied, 75 U.S.L.W. 3013 (2005); includes links to petition and to briefs of the parties.
Salt Lake Tribune, Apr. 4, 2003, “9 Utahns Must Pay Lloyd’s”
archived copy, same article
For judgment on appeal, see Society of Lloyd’s v. Reinhart, 402 F.3d 982 (10th Cir.), consolidating Utah and New Mexico appeals, Cert. denied, 546 U.S. 826 (No. 04-1731, Oct. 3, 2005)
— order

Society of Lloyd’s v. Bennett, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25476 (D. Utah, Mar. 17, 2003) (Motion for relief from posting supersedeas bond denied)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Bennett, 204 Fed.Appx. 728 (10th Cir. 2006) (debtor’s stipulation regarding the extension of the writ of garnishment waived any objections to magistrate judge’s authority).

Society of Lloyd’s v. Bennett, 182 Fed.Appx. 840 (10th Cir. 2006) ((1) district court lacked jurisdiction to grant motion for relief from judgment; (2) collateral estoppel did not apply to preclude Lloyd’s from making disputed exchange rate argument; (3) Utah’s parol evidence rule did not preclude consideration of declaration of Lloyd’s English solicitor to clarify scope of contract and determine whether regulator should be judicially estopped from arguing that contract’s exchange rate did not apply; and (4) application of Utah’s Foreign-Money Claims Act to Lloyd’s judgments was the law of case.)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Berkos, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2129 (N.D. Ill. 2000) (enforcement of English judgment; citation to discover assets of judgment debtor) (see below for docket)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Berkos, copy of District Court docket (N.D. Ill.)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Blackwell, 127 Fed. Appx. 961 (9th Cir. 2005) (applying Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act)

Same case: Society of Lloyd’s v. Blackwell et al., S.D. Cal. 2003 COMPLETE DOCKET (enforcement of English judgment against many California Lloyd’s investors) (most of the substantive documents in this case may be downloaded FREE from this site using hyperlinks within the docket )

Bobe v. Lloyd’s, 10 F.2d 730 (2d Cir. 1926) (holding that Lloyd’s was doing business in New York State and was subject to service of process)

Bonny v. Society of Lloyd’s, 3 F.3d 156 (7th Cir. 1993)
same case below, 784 F.Supp. 1350 (N.D. Ill. 1991) (ASCII)
copy of District Court docket, N.D. Ill.

Society of Lloyd’s v. Borgers, 127 Fed. Appx. 959, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 6404 (9th Cir. 2005) (Enforcement of English judgment; due process issues)
&mdash Same case below: District Court judgment (unreported)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Boudreau , Palm Beach County, Fla (Judith Boudreau, pro se), order denying summary judgment to Lloyd’s on Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Enforcement Act claim

Brown v. Lloyd’s (In re Brown), 219 B.R. 275 (Bankr. S.D. Tex.) A/P mem. op. Oct. 3, 1997
same, from Bankruptcy Reporter (RTF)

Equitas Reinsurance Ltd. v. Browning Ferris Inds., Inc., 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 2710 (affirming denial of special appearance by Equitas: “we find that Equitas has not met the burden of negating all bases of asserting specific jurisdiction”)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Campbell-White, No. 03-10950-RCL, slip op. (order) (D. Mass. Aug 23, 2004)
same, suggestion of bankruptcy
(collection case)
Docket in bankruptcy case of Peter C. Pierce

Society of Lloyd’s v. Carter, U.S. Dist. Court, D.N.H., case # cv-020452-M (denial of motion to dismiss and petition to change venue to S.D. Fla.)
same, 2003 WL 1191399, 55 Fed.R.Serv.3d 265, 2003 DNH 40, D.N.H., Mar 14, 2003

In re Lloyd’s American Trust Fund Litig., 928 F.Supp. 333 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)
— same: 954 F.Supp 656 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)

same, In re Lloyd’s American Trust Fund Litigation, 2002 WL 31663577 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) (order approving settlement of class action) By settlement Agreement dated May 8, 2002, class members asre entitled to cash payment of, typically, $786.23 and “transferable debt credit” of $1,900.00 which may be transferred or sold. Chicago Clearing Corp. undertook to host an auction market in the credits for holders who register by “6:00 pm Eastern Standard [sic] Time May 31, 2004”. Further info from Gilardi & Co., LLC , P.O. Box 1110, Corte Madera, CA 94976-1110, (415) 461-0410.

LATF case, judgment enforcement opposition documents and position papers (May 2004):
“More on the Lloyd’s Trap”
“North Carolina Defense”
“North Carolina Answer”

Notice of class action: Lloyd’s American Trust Fund case
another copy (284k).

Society of Lloyd’s v. Cohen, 108 Fed.Appx. 126 (5th Cir. 2004), 2004 WL 1759248, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 16128 (Tex.) (enforcement of judgment case)

In re Collins, 250 B.R. 645 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2000) (Patrick Collins: sanctions against debtor Lloyd’s investor and bankruptcy counsel in dismissed Chapter 7 case where exempt assets exceeded value of Lloyd’s claims. Compare In re Sills, below.)
Docket for above case – NOTE: the only downloadable document on this docket is the Petition (PDF)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Collins, 284 F.3d 727 (7th Cir. 2002) (Asset protection issues; same party: certain assets of Collins and Callahan, two investors in Lloyd’s, held exempt from garnishment in enforcement of judgment action by Lloyd’s)
same, HTML
same, on Findlaw site

Society of Lloyd’s v. Collins, copy of District Court docket, N.D. Ill. (Lloyd’s enforcement of judgment action)

Collins v. Society of Lloyd’s, 874 So. 2d 672 (Fla. App. 4th Dist. 2004), 29 Fla. L. Weekly D1233, May 19, 2004

Society of Lloyd’s v. Davies, 107 Fed. Appx. 887 (Table), 2004 WL 1236968, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 19670 (11th Cir. (Ga.)) , May 24, 2004) (includes appeal briefs of the parties)

Doughty v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, 6 F.3d 856 (1st Cir. 1993) (Reinsurance company’s state receiver sueing under reinsurance contracts; only procedural issues decided)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Edelman et al., 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15577 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (exchange rate issue; enforcement of judgment case against 8 defendants)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Edelman, 2005 WL 639412 (S.D.N.Y.) (enforcement of judgment against some of same defendants as above)
— Docket of above case (no downloadable documents)

Ellis v. Society of Lloyd’s, 944 So.2d 351 (Fla. App. 1 Dist. 2006) (affirming without opinion judgment for Lloyd’s in collection action(

Society of Lloyd’s v. Eynon, S.D. Ohio, 1-04-cv-00187-24-SDOH

Forgosh bankruptcy case: access via dockets; principal documents may be downloaded in PDF format here; for others, see PACER
Case No. 05-38890 (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, D. Minn.)
Case No. 06-03857 (U.S. District Court, D. Minn.)
Case No. 06-03858 (U.S. District Court, D. Minn.)
Issues: Fraudulent conveyance, enforcement of foreign money judgment, community property and postnuptial agreement, bad-faith Chapter 7 filing. Forgosh is a Minnesota lawyer.

Society of Lloyd’s v. Fuerst, 2005 WL 1606011, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 14003 (8th Cir. (Mo.)) (enforcement of foreign judgment)
— DOCKET of Fuerst case in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, with many downloadable documents. color="navy" See especially Item 99 for copies of recent U.S. judgments in favor of Lloyd’s, including some unreported judgments not otherwise indexed on this site.

Corporation of Lloyd’s v. Elizabeth M. Funk a/k/a Elizabeth M. Cameron-Webb, 91 N.Y.2d 1002, 698 N.E.2d 958, 676 N.Y.S.2d 129 (Ct. App. N.Y. 1998) (motion for leave to appeal dism’d upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from lacks finality) (included here by reason of Cameron-Webb connection)

In re Gibson, N.D.N.Y. Case No. 98-60690 (Chapt. 13 case dismissed upon motion by Lloyd’s: held 2-party dispute; debtor had failed to modify his lifestyle. Jurisdiction and venue otherwise approved for Canadian resident with U.S. property.)

Grace v. Corporation of Lloyd’s, 1997 WL 607543 (S.D.N.Y.) (RTF) (enforcement of foreign judgment)
same, from court server

Society of Lloyd’s v. Grace (Supreme Court, N.Y. County, Index No. 604065/98, judgment of Nov. 12, 1999 (unreported) (enforcement of English judgment against the Graces in state court)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Grace, 278 A.D.2d 169, 718 N.Y.S.2d 327 (1st Dept. 2000) (opinion of Supreme Court Appellate Div. affirming judgment on basis of comity and enforcing English judgment; due process and public policy issues rejected)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Hamilton, 2007 WL 2280027, 501 F.Supp.2d 248 (D. Mass.) (another collection case)
Court version, Findings and Recommendations

Society of Lloyd’s v. Harmsen (In re Harmsen), 320 B.R. 188 (Bankr. 10th Cir. BAP 2005) (affirming dismissal by D. Utah Bankruptcy Court of involuntary bankruptcy petition filed by Lloyd’s)

In re Harmsen, judgment of Bankruptcy Court., D. Utah
docket, with downloadable involuntary petition and many other case documents, including some motions, orders and briefs

Williams v. Harrison (In re Estate of A. Cary Harrison III, Debtor in a Foreign Proceeding, Case No. 8:08-bk-07002-KRM (Chapt. 15). (“the Court finds as a matter of law no fraud, no breach of fiduciary duty, no basis for equitable lien on the transferred homestead property, and no cause of action under Chapter 726, Florida Statutes.”)
See Docket with downloadable files, including the submissions by Lloyd’s and responses of the defendant.

Haynsworth v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 121 F.3d 956 (5th Cir. 1997)

In re Head, 223 B.R. 648, 32 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 1222 (W.D.N.Y. 1998) (Certain Canadian domiciliaries could not file bankruptcy petitions in the U.S. to avoid forum selection clause) NOTE: This was the first direct intervention by Lloyd’s in a bankruptcy case. Lloyd’s did not intervene in several other earlier and later cases where alien investors were factually insolvent (or nearly so) and had spent at least several months in the U.S. prior to filing.

Society of Lloyd’s v. Hudson, 276 F.Supp.2d 1110 (D.Nev. 2003) (enforcement of English judgment against Lloyd’s investor)

Hugel v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 999 F.2d 206 (7th Cir. 1993) (enforcement of the English forum selection clause of the “General Undertaking”)

Konold v. R.W. Sturge, Ltd., 108 Ohio App. 3d 309; 670 N.E.2d 574; 1996 Ohio App. LEXIS 87 (1996) (probate court’s order refusing to dismiss declaratory judgment action was not “final and appealable”)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Lee, U.S. Dist. Court, D.Colo., case #02-cv-1979 (enforcement of English judgment case, with counterclaim by defendant): DocketAnswer & counterclaim
— Docket, consolidated case including above defendant, Society of Lloyd’s v. Sommer
— Docket, same case following settlement by Sommer, re-titled Society of Lloyd’s v. Silversmith (with links to selected downloadable court documents)
— Final judgment in favor of Lloyd’s
in Society of Lloyd’s v. Silversmith (unreported, HTML)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Lee, Slip Copy, 2007 WL 2126381 (D.Colo.) (Judgment of July 23, 2007)

Leslie v. Lloyd’s of London, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15380
same case, another version: 1995 WL 661090 (S.D.Tex.); 64 USLW 2239 (ASCII)
— Leslie v. Lloyd’s of London, 1994 WL 873350 (S.D. Tex., Nov. 2, 1994)
—  REVERSED BY: Haynsworth v. The Corporation, 121 F3d. 956 (5th Cir. 1997) (ASCII)

Lipcon v. Lloyd’s of London, 148 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir. 1998)
same from

In re Lowry, SA98-12113-JR, Ch. 11, Bankr., C.D. Cal. (Judgment of dismissal on motion by Lloyd’s, issued July 20, 1998, on grounds that underlying issue was two-party dispute, that debtor was indisputably solvent, and that motivation for case was forum-shopping) (see also Blackwell case, above, 5 years later)

In re Lyons, docket in Jeremy Lyons’ 1995 Chapter 7 bankruptcy, S.D. Fla., 95-22606
Docket in adversarial proceeding brought by trustee
(Case was dismissed 4/30/96 following an agreement between Lyons and Lloyd’s; Lloyd’s paid a substantial sum to complensate the trustee for an investigation she had underatken when Lloyd’s falsely accused Lyons of conceaning assets, and Lloyd’s agreed to pay for arbitration in London between Lyons and his Member’s Agent. That arbitration, found in favor of the Agent.)

McDade v. Nationsbank of Texas, N.A., 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21095 (not found on Westlaw) (fraud claim; Lloyd’s motion for dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction granted)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Est. of McMurray, 274 F.3d 1133 (7th Cir. 2001) (enforcement of Lloyd’s judgment against assets of deceased investor in inter-vivos trust into which decedent had transferred real and personal property worth $3.8 million: fraudulent conveyance and 2-year probate statute of limitations issues not reached; trust held responsible for debts under its own terms)
Digest and comment (
same case below, 2001 WL 471939 (N.D. Ill. 2001)

Malone v. Equitas Reinsurance Limited, L.A. Co. Super. Ct. 12/2/00 (jurisdictional issues on Equitas)
same case in Court of Appeal, 84 Cal. App. 4th 1430 (2000) (see other Equitas cases in light green section above, left: click on “Table of Equitas court cases”)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Michalove, W.D.N.C., 3-03-cv-00594-59-DID

Society of Lloyd’s v. Moore, Slip Copy, 2006 WL 3167735 (S.D. Ohio, 2006), Nov. 1, 2006 (fraudulent transfer issues; arbitration and mediation; this opinion concerns privileged nature of certain communications from the mediator)
Stipulated entry of permanent injunction and dismissal (settlement agreement attached)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Mullin, 255 F.Supp. 2d 468 (E.D. Pa. 2003), (enforcing English judgment against Lloyd’s investor)
same document, RTF Format, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4741
same, affirmed on appeal, 96 Fed. Appx. 100 (3d Cir. 2004), 2004 WL 1012904, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 8968, Mar. 25, 2004
Newspaper report of interview, The Reporter, Feb. 1, 2005

Society of Lloyd’s v. Price (In re Price), 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22783, 2004 WL 2550590 , W. D. Tex., Nov. 10, 2004

Society of Lloyd’s v. Reinhart, 402 F.3d 982, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 4732, 2005 WL 668806 (10th Cir. (N.M.)) (enforcement of judgment case)
same, from court server (RTF)
Text of Appellate Brief filed by Lloyd’s

Richards v. Lloyd’s of London, 107 F.3d 1422 (9th Cir. 1997)
same, from

Richards v. Lloyd’s of London, 121 F.3d 565 (9th Cir. 1997) (decision for rehearing en banc)

Richards v. Lloyd’s of London, 135 F.3d 1289 (9th Cir. 1998) (same case, reversal on rehearing)
Hansard discussion of British Embassy involvement in case
SEC brief amicus curiae
Journal of Insurance Regulation commentary
another article: enforcement of arbitration agreements
Los Angeles County Bar Assn. site, Michael L. Nov icoff articloe, commentary on Richards case
Baltimore Sun article, Aug. 28, 1996
Comment by Michael L. Nivocoff (rendered moot by subsequent events, but it does raise some useful points)
Findlaw archive of documents in this case

Riley v. Kingsley Underwriting Agencies Ltd., 969 F.2d 953 (10th Cir. 1992)
—  Petition by Roby plaintiffs for Writ of Certiorari
—  Reply Memorandum by Society of Lloyd’s

Harry Collins Roach, et al., enforcement of English judgment, accessible via dockets:
— Society of Lloyd’s v. Eyon, Fleck & Roach, U.S.D.C. Ohio, Case No. 06-3643
— Society of Lloyd’s v. Roach, U.S.D.C., N.D. Ala. Case No. 06-3643
Selected documents may be downloaded from the archived dockets; for others see PACER

Roby v. Corporation of Lloyd’s, 796 F.Supp, 103 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (Lloyd’s syndicates are not separate legal entities subject to service of process)
The Wall Street Journal, June 17, 1992, “Lloyd’s Scores Victory in Fight with Investors”

Roby v. Corporation of Lloyd’s, 824 F.Supp 336 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (forum selection clause enforced)
New York Times report of filing of the case, “U.S. Investors Sue Lloyd’s” , Oct. 22, 1991, p. D10.
The Wall Street Journal, Aug. 30, 1991, “Lloyd’s of London, Hit by Losses, Also Faces Legal Wrangle in U.S.”

Roby v. Corporation of Lloyd’s, 996 F.2d 1353 (2nd Cir. 1993)
copy of petition for certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court (denied)
brief for defendants-appellees members’ agents

Society of Lloyd’s v. Roby, N.D. Ohio (Cleveland), 1-04-mc-00007-LW, Docket (“notice of filing foreign judgment” and all subsequent papers, including order dismissing case upon initiation by Lloyd’s of separate civil case and filing by defendant of “notice of filing bankruptcy”)

In re Roby, Bankr. N.D. Ohio (Canton), 04-61365-rk, Docket (petition and numerous documents may be downloaded free; the purpose is to show Lloyd’s investors considering bankruptcy what Lloyd’s strategy is likely to be. NOTE, however, the 2005 amendments to the Bankruptcy Code (“Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005” (for details see the ABI site or the text at LOC’s Thomas) are likely to put Chapter 7 out of reach of most; Chapter 11 may still be possible provided that (following In re Collins) exempt assets do not exceed the value of Lloyd’s claims.)

Rosenblatt v. Ernst and Young Int’l Ltd., 87 F.Supp. 2d 1048 (S.D. Cal. 2000 (suit by a Lloyd’s investor against Cayman Islands accounting firm for negligent misrepresentation)

Rosenblatt v. Ernst and Young Int’l Ltd., 27 Fed.Appx. 731, 2002 U.S.App.LEXIS 1575 (9th Cir. 2002) (appeal of above) (see also Blackwell case, above)

In re Scheinuk, Bankr. 93-11134 (Bankr. E.D. La.) – Proof of claim filed by Lloyd’s (same POC, in PDF format) The 1993 Scheinuk Chapter 11 bankruptcy is of particular historical interest. Its usefulness for current debtors is questionable since Lloyd’s strategy has changed and the case law has moved on. Furthermore, Lloyd’s has now obtained English judgments against most of its target investor-debtors for Equitas premiums and/or Central Fund demands. As in the Jeremy Lyons (95-22606, Bankr. S.D. Fla.) and the Kissell (92-16589, Bankr. N.D. Ill.) cases and in the Daniel Gross probate proceeding (S.D. Fla.), Lloyd’s was led to settle, but in the Scheinuk case it was because Lloyd’s counsel had inadvisedly filed a proof of claim, giving the U.S. bankruptcy court jurisdiction over a counterclaim that Lloyd’s was not (yet) ready to defend. Unlike some Lloyd’s judgment debtors, Scheinuk had substantial non-Lloyd’s debts.

Shell v. R.W. Sturge Ltd., 55 F.3d 1227 (6th Cir. 1995) (action to rescind investment contract; dismissal affirmed)
same, from 1995 Fed/App. 0176P
—  same case in court below, 850 F. Supp. 620 (S.D. Ohio 1993).

Society of Loyd’s v. Shields, 118 Fed. Appx. 12, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 24105, 6th Cir. Nov. 17, 2004 (enforcement of Engish judgments for Eqitas premiums)

Society of Loyd’s v. Siemon-Netto, 457 F.3d 94, 372 U.S.App.D.C. 448, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20239 (enforcement of Engish judgments for Eqitas premiums)
See docket, this case: App. D.C. Cir. 04-7214, 12/30/04
— Docket, case below, 03-01524 (D.D.C.); mem. judgment, Aug. 20, 2004 (PDF)
See docket, subsequent bankruptcy case: Bankr. D.C. Cir. 05-00720, filed 5/9/05, discharge granted 9/27/05.

In re Sills, 250 B.R. 675 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2000) (bankruptcy case; denial of sanctions to Lloyd’s)
another copy , from court server
Docket from above case - NOTE: the only downloadable documents on this docket are the Petition (PDF) (item #1) and item ## 10, 49, 66 & 77

Stamm v. Barclays Bank of New York, 153 F.3d 30 (2nd Cir. 1998) (forum selection provisions enforced)
same case below, 960 F.Supp. 724 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (dismissal with leave to amend)
same case below, 1997 WL 438773 (granting defendant’s motion t dismiss)
same case, 1996 WL 614087 (denying plaintiffs’ motion to remand to state court)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Sumerel, Slip Copy, 2007 WL 2114381 (M.D.Fla.) (Collection case)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Sundlun, D.R.I., Docket # 1:06-cv-00106-L-LDA (collection case, settled; principal documents can be downloaded from docket page)

Syndicate 420 at Lloyd’s v. Early Am. Ins., 796 F.2d 821 (5th Cir. 1986) (ASCII)

Tropp v. Corporation of Lloyd’s, S.D.N.Y. Docket No. 07-cv-414 (Includes most of the documents of the litigation in downloadable PDF format)
Judgment of Mar. 25, 2008 dismissing Tropp complaint against Lloyd’s (reported as Tropp v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30635 (S.D.N.Y., Mar. 25, 2008)
Chris Blackhurst article, Evening Standard, Apr. 14, 2008, discussing dismissal of case
— Anita Raghavan, The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 27, 2007, “A Legal Battle Against Lloyd’s Gives Rare View” (Issue raised in Tropp case in U.S. enforcement of judgment case as to parliamentary intent in passage of the Lloyd’s Act 1982)
— Tropp v. Corporation of Lloyd’s, 385 Fed. Appx. 36; 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14657 dismissal of Tropp’s pro se appeal

Tropp v. Corporation of Lloyd’s, Documents and materials related to Supreme Court certiorari petition:
Tropp’s Petition for Certiorari, April 11, 2011
Amicus brief of Jeremy McBride in support of Petitioner, April 13, 2011
Amicus brief of Geoffrey C. Hazard & Michael Traynor on behalf of Petitioner, May 13, 2001
Amicus brief of American Names Association in support of Petitioner, May 13, 2011
Fried Frank brief on behalf of Corp. of Lloyd’s in opposition, June 3, 2011
Reply brief for Petitioner, June 7, 2011
Decision of U.S. Supreme Court denying certiorari, 79 U.S.L.W. 3728, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4826 (June 27, 2011)

Tufts v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 981 F.Supp. 808 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)

Tufts v. Corp. of Lloyd’s, 128 F.3d 793 (2nd Cir. 1997)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Turner, 303 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 2002) (as corrected Sept. 24, 2002) (affirming enforcement in U.S. of English default judgment against Turner and Webb under Uniform Foreign Money-Judgment Recognition Act); also 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 16904, Jul. 25, 2002, decision without published opinion

In re Turner, Bankr. S.D. Fla., Chapt. 13 Case # 98-30456, copy of Docket (included as an example of one of many successful U.S. bankruptcy cases, leading to discharge of Lloyd’s claims (Mr. & Mrs. Turner are Canadian citizens resident in the U.S.))

Union Pacific R. Co. v. Equitas Limited, 987 P.2d 954 (Colo. 1999) (RTF) (Equitas not subject to jurisdiction of the court; dismissed as defendant)

Union Pacific R. Co. v. Century Indemnity Co., Dist. Ct. Denver, CO, Case No. 97-CV- 6951 (Equitas Ltd. (Lloyd’s captive reinsurer) brief denying jurisdiction of U.S. courts)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Webb, 156 F.Supp.2d 632 (N.D. Tex. 2001) (RTF) (Granting summary judgment for Lloyd’s and enforcing English judgment; relying on Ashenden case (above), “the Court finds that Webb has been afforded due process in the English courts”)

Society of Lloyd’s v. Webb, 303 F.2d 325 (5th Cir. July 25, 2002) and 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 16904 (affirmingwithout opinion District Court judgment for Lloyd’s)

West v. Lloyd’s, 1997 WL 1114662 (Cal.App. 2 Dist.)
Brief for Appellants (West)
Brief for Resondent (Lloyd’s)
—  (unpublished decision) Corp. of Lloyd’s v. Los Angeles County Superior Court, ex rel. West, 1998 Cal. LEXIS 8110 (Sup. Ct. Cal.) (petition for review denied without opinion) This is the sole case outside of bankruptcy to result in a resounding victory for the investor against Lloyd’s. Unfortunately that result depended upon unique facts and timing, and is shrouded in secrecy. The lead lawyer for the West family was Earle Hale, Esq., Williamsburg, VA.

DOCKETS of specimen U.S. District Court cases in Lloyd’s enforcement of judgment proceedings – an important source of guidance for future cases (some with free downloadable files and documents):
Benz - Blackwell - Cohen - Denbo - Fuerst - Hertel - Lee - Martin - Methvin - Neely - Poley - Shields - Siemon-Netto

Krebs & Soby (S. Carolina collection case, filed Dec. 15, 2003) docket with links to complaint and all other documents through Jan. 27, 2004, downloadable free

Bennett case (Utah) - same, 10th Cir. appeal

SOME BANKRUPTCY DOCKETS with petitions and major pleadings, including (where applicable) Lloyd’s motions to dismiss (see above, yellow section, for some additional, related materials)
Brady, see also: Letter from Bankruptcy Judge Clark regarding Equitas return premium (PDF) Opinion referred to in Clark letter: 368 B.R. 579 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2007) (PDF) Collins Lowry Pierce Roby Scheinuk Sills Surman Turner
(Note that Lloyd’s motions to dismiss cite other dismissed cases, but that many of these citations are out of context. Aside from cases like Carter, Collins and Lowry where debtors were solvent, exempt assets taken into consideration, are cases like Siemon-Netto and Lyons. In Siemon-Netto, Judge Blackshear was misled regarding heavily-mortgaged French real estate and the couple’s joint Ch, 13 was further muddled by the fact that a separate bankruptcy case dealt with at the same time involved a solvent Lloyd’s debtor. In Lyons and Kissell (early bankruptcy cases) Lloyd’s settled and cancelled all the investors’ Lloyd’s debts. In Head, Judge Kaplan refused to distinguish between debtors who owned US real estate in the District and spent substantial time there and those who had only nominal connection with the USA. It goes without saying that the 50-60% of successful Ch. 7, 11 & 13 bankruptcy filings, in which claims by Lloyd’s were discharged and the investor got on with his or her life, have been unremarked in the published record of case law.)

Critical Web Sites

American Names’ self-help group site: “Lliars of London” ( index)
mirror site, “Truth About Lloyd’s” (operational as of September 2008 but not updated since 2006)

Sally Noel’s page, (index of captured pages from
— Sally Noel’s blog.
— Sally Noel’s data packet (PDF, 17 pages, 5.72 mb)

The “Gotcha” site (on international maritime insurance fraud)

European Lloyd’s investors project (apparently defunct, link is to copy at spoof: The sinking of Lloyd’s of London

High Premium Group (apparently defunct, link is to copy at “trading through” (but see The Economist, April 7, 2004 article )

Association of Lloyd’s Members (traditionally co-opted by Lloyd’s)

Some sites and blogs, selected by G o o g l e


∗  ∗  ∗  ∗  ∗  ∗

Last correction/modification to this page:  Oct. 12, 2014

Copyright © 2000-2014 by , Girne, KKTC (Kyrenia, TRNC)

No copyright claimed in public domain materials. British legal materials are Crown Copyright, reprinted with permission (HMSO “Dear Publisher” letter). As for US cases, see Matthew Bender v. West Pub. Co., 158 F.3d 674 (2d Cir. 1998) (arrangement of cases not subject to copyright); 158 F.3d 693 (2d Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 119 S.Ct. 2039 (1999) (“star pagination”). Fair Use and Public Interest claimed with regard to other cited and quoted cases and materials, see below.

Cases and materials are absolutely in the public domain after 50 years (Canada), 70 or75 years (Europe), up to 95 years (USA). (See comparative chart here. For other countries, see a further chart. But note: “In accordance with 17 U.S.C. § 107, certain material otherwise protected by copyright may be made available without profit for research, educational and political information purposes.” The preceding is by way of guidance on further dissemination of the material collected here. This site is maintained at Girne, KKTC, and by using it readers acknowledge that their use is solely governed by the laws and judicial system of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.