Jersey Unreported Judgments

2002/20

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

22^nd January, 2002

 

 

 

 

Application by Plaintiff for Order that sums frozen pursuant to injunctions in Order of Justice of 20^th December, 2000, be paid into High Court of England and Wales in accordance with an Order of the said High Court, dated 14^th November, 2001.

 

 

Advocate M. Renouf for the Plaintiff.

The Defendant did not appear and was not represented.

The Party Cited has been released from the action.

 

 

 

judgment

the bailiff:  

1.        This is an application by the Financial Services Authority of the United Kingdom, to which we shall refer to as "the F.S.A." for an order that certain sums frozen by order of this Court should now be paid out of the jurisdiction into an account in the name of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.

2.        The sums of money were frozen by order of the Deputy Bailiff pursuant to an Order of Justice on 20^th December, 2000.  That order of the Deputy Bailiff was made in aid of proceedings issued out of the High Court of Justice in England.   Subsequently, judgment has been given in the High Court against the Defendant, and at paragraph 15 of the Summary Judgment it is recorded:

"Further to the orders at paragraphs 4 to 8 above, the Defendant to pay into Court all those sums referred to in the first affidavit of Nigel Rowley held in the Defendant's bank accounts with Barclays Bank plc in Jersey and La Caixa Bank in Barcelona."

3.        The first affidavit of Nigel Rowley has been exhibited to an affidavit of Wilson Hammond Thorburne, and provides, under the heading:

"Bank Accounts -

1 Barclays Bank plc, Jersey, sort code 20-45-05, account No: 70978620:  the balance as at today in sterling account £36,919.64, dollar account U.S.$5,955.65."

4.        Counsel has asked that the Court make a finding that the judgment of the English Court is registerable pursuant to the provisions of the Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Jersey) Law 1960 .  We record that we are satisfied that the provisions of Article 3 of that Law are satisfied, in that the judgement is final and conclusive between the parties.  There is payable a sum of money which is not payable in respect of taxes or other charges of a like nature, or in respect of a fine or other penalty, and is given after the coming into operation of the Act directing that the 1960 Law shall extend to England and Wales.

5.        We remit to the Judicial Greffier the consideration of a formal application pursuant to the Rules.   The order made by the Deputy Bailiff also contained further injunctions and at the request of Counsel for the F.S.A. we discharge those injunctions with effect from the date of registration of the judgment by the Judicial Greffier. Counsel has also asked us to consider one other matter which arises from the terms of Article 4(3) of the 1960 Law.  That statutory provision states :

"Where the sum payable under a judgement which is to be registered is expressed in a currency other than the currency of Jersey, the judgement shall be registered as if it were a judgement for such sum in the currency of Jersey as on the basis of the rate of exchange prevailing at the date of the judgement of the original Court is equivalent to the sums so payable."  

6.        That statutory provision is clearly mandatory, but Counsel has asked us to consider giving a direction to the Judicial Greffier authorising the party cited to pay over the sum of money in the dollar account in that currency, without converting the US dollars into sterling.  There appears to us to be nothing which prevents the Court from making such an order.  The judgment must be registered in the currency of Jersey, but we authorise the party cited to pay over to the High Court in England the moneys in the accounts at the Bank, reconverted, in the case of the dollar account, to U.S dollars at the rate of exchange prevailing at the date of judgment, that is to say 14^th November, 2001.

7.        We also authorise, as requested by the F.S.A, that the party cited be paid its reasonable costs, such costs to be paid by the Defendant, but to be met by the F.S.A in the first instance, and thereafter to be recoverable from the Defendant.  We also direct that the Defendant should pay the costs of, and incidental to, the action on the standard basis.

Authorities

Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgment (Jersey) Law 1960.

Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Jersey) Rules 1961.