Lewis Floissac Plaintiff/Appellant v Boswell Williams Defendant/Respondent [ECSC]

• Jurisdiction: St Lucia
• Judge: CECIL LEWIS, C.J. (ag.),ST. BERNARD, J.A.,GLASGOW, J.A. (ag.),Acting Chief Justice
• Judgment Date: 30 September 1974
• Judgment citation (vLex): [1974] ECSC J0930-1
• Docket Number: CIVIL APPPEAL NO. 4 OF 1973
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saint Lucia)
• Date: 30 September 1974

[1974] ECSC J0930-1

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

Before:

The Hon. The Acting Chief Justice

The Hon. Mr. Justice St. Bernard

The Hon. Mr. Justice Glasgow (ag.)

CIVIL APPPEAL NO. 4 OF 1973

Between:

Lewis Floissac

Plaintiff/Appellant

and

Boswell Williams

Defendant/Respondent

D. McNamara, Q.C. for appellant.

Respondent in person.

CECIL LEWIS, C.J. (ag.)

1 The appellant obtained a consent judgment against the respondent for $ 1,600 together with interest and costs on July 12 1967. Two years later the appellant by a deed of assignment made an absolute assignment of his judgment dept to Floissac Holdings Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the assignees") who gave due notice thereof in writing to the respondent and requested his to pay the said debt to the assignees.

2 The respondent failed to pay the assignees us requested and the appellant accordingly issued a writ of execution in his own name for the seizure and sale of the respondent's property.

3 Pursuant to article 519 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the respondent riled an opposition to the seizure and sale of his property. The text ground on which the opposition was based were the following: (a) the appellant having assigned the judgment debt, ceased to have any interest in the suit and therefore could not sue out a writ of execution (b) by reason of the assignment of the judgment debt the appellant ceased to be a judgment creditor and according to the laws of Saint Lucia he could not issue a writ of execution. Support for this latter proposition was said to be round in article 44 or the code of Civil Procedure and article 1493 of the Civil Code.

4 The appellant filed an affidavit in reply to the respondent's opposition in which he text that (a) he had assigned absolutely the text to the assignees on July 14 1969, (b) the writ of execution was issue with the full knowledge and agreement of the assignees (c) he is still on record as the plaintiff in the original action (d) the Registrar of the high court was notified by the assignees of the assignment, (e) any arcunts paid to me from the proceeds of the judicial sale of the respondent's property would be held in trust by him for, and paid over to the assignees, (f) the respondent will not in any way be affected by the fact that the writ of execution was issued in the appellant's name.

5 The question which therefore arises is whether in the circumstances mentioned above the appellant as assignor can issue a writ of execution for the seizure and sale of the respondent's property? In my opinion the answer to this question is in the negative.

6 The assignor although still a party to the cause has parted with all interest in the judgment debt and has no longer any rights in the judgment, he has ceased to be a creditor of the respondent or to have any claim against his because all his rights under the judgment have been assigned to the assignees. In view of these facts, it is not in my...