Analysis
The bank, which was the executor of the estate of Jimmy Savile, sought the approval of the court to the making of final distributions out of the estate to numerous individuals (PI claimants) who had applied for compensation under a scheme designed to notify, process and settle claims without formal case management in court (scheme). As well as claims against the bank, many of the PI claimants had parallel claims against third parties including the BBC, NHS, Barnardos and MIND. The scheme, which had been opposed by the first and second defendants acting as the trustees of the Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust (the trust), was approved by Sales J on 11 March 2014 ([2014] WTLR 637). The Court of Appeal (Patten, Gloster & Bean LJJ) dismissed the trust’s appeal on 16 December 2014 ([2015] WTLR 635). The scheme had now effectively run its course and the present application was a final stage in the administration of the estate, as it was provided that no distribution should be made without the approval of a judge of the Chancery Division. As regards the financial position, having regard to the total value of the claims, indemnities and costs, the estate was insolvent.
Held (approving the distributions by the bank out of the estate under the scheme):
The bank had demonstrated that the claims had been properly scrutinised, assessed and settled. Accordingly, the payments agreed to be made by the bank and a pro rata distribution of the residual balance agreed between the BBC, NHS, Barnardos and MIND was approved. The bank could not be expected to retain indefinitely assets against the possibility of proceedings being commenced in relation to either rejected claims or out-of-time claims (whether or not intimated). The effect of approving the distribution of the estate in the manner sought by the bank would therefore render any such claims irrecoverable. Orders would also be made ratifying (without qualification) dispositions already made by the bank during the period from 7 December 2013 to 27 May 2016 and dispositions yet to be made in the period thereafter. Objections made by the trust to the application were rejected. In particular, the suggestion that the court should abort the settlement of the PI claimants’ claims arrived at after much time, trouble and expense on the basis that the law required the estate to be administered by the making of an insolvency administration order was wrong. Indeed, the relevant legislation specifically contemplated an insolvent estate being administered out of court and out of bankruptcy.
JUDGMENT WARREN J: Introduction [1] This application is the final stage of the administration of the estate of Jimmy Savile (JS). It concerns the distribution of JS’s estate (the estate) in the implementation of the scheme approved by Sales J (the scheme), his order being made on 1 April 2014. The events leading to the …Continue reading "National Westminster Bank plc v Lucas & ors [2016] EWHC 1934 (Ch)"