Smith and another (Appellants) v Royal Bank of Scotland (Respondent)
Case ID: 2022/0004
Case summary
Issue
This appeal concerns the proper interpretation of section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The key issue is whether, in assessing the fairness of a relationship between a debtor and a creditor, the court can compartmentalise the relationship and, accordingly, consider whether the relationship is unfair at a given point, rather than at the end of the relationship.
Facts
The appeal arises from two separate claims for compensation under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, each brought on the ground that an unfair relationship arose between the claimant debtor and the defendant creditor. The allegation in each case is that an unfair relationship arose by reason of RBS’s non-disclosure of commission received from the insurer in respect of payment protection insurance (“PPI”) policies taken out at the same time as agreements for credit cards from RBS. The claimant in each case succeeded at first instance before a District Judge, and on first appeal to a Circuit Judge. The Court of Appeal heard appeals in both cases together. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeals and dismissed the claims. The claimants now appeal to the Supreme Court.
Judgment appealed
Parties
Appellant(s)
Karen Smith and another
Respondent(s)
Royal Bank of Scotland Plc
Appeal
Justices
Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs, Lord Kitchin, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt
Hearing start date
12 January 2023
Hearing finish date
12 January 2023
| Watch hearing | ||
|---|---|---|
| 12 January 2023 | Morning session | Afternoon session |
Judgment details
Judgment date
4 October 2023
Neutral citation
[2023] UKSC 34
- Judgment (PDF)
- Press Summary (PDF)
- Judgment on The National Archives (HTML version)
- Press Summary on The National Archives (HTML version)
- Judgment on BAILII (HTML version)
| Watch Judgment summary | |
|---|---|
| 4 October 2023 | Judgment summary |