Bank Notes

November 2014

13/11/14

TCHENGUIZ v DIRECTOR OF THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE [2014] EWCA Civ 1471

On the facts the judge had been right to order the appellant to pay indemnity costs of an application under CPR 31.22 for permission to use disclosed documents otherwise than in the proceedings in which they were disclosed. But the judge had been wrong to suggest that the respondent to an application under CPR 31.22 should usually be entitled to a full costs indemnity.

12/11/14

PLEVIN v PARAGON PERSONAL FINANCE LTD [2014] UKSC 61

Non-disclosure of the amount of commissions paid in respect of a PPI policy made the creditor’s relationship with the debtor unfair and justified reopening the transaction under s 140A CCA 1974. The decision in Harrison v Black Horse Ltd (2012) that the relationship could not be unfair if the creditor had not breached duties imposed by the ICOB regulatory regime, was wrong. A wider range of considerations may be relevant to the fairness of the relationship including the characteristics of the borrower. It is a question of degree. Here the commissions were so large that the customer should not have been kept in ignorance. The creditor was responsible for making the relationship unfair by failing to disclose the size of the commissions. The creditor had no regulatory or other duty to assess the borrower’s needs. Although s 140A also covered things done on behalf of the creditor, this requires agency to be established and the independent broker could not be regarded as the creditor’s agent.

11/11/14

LIE v MOHILE [2014] EWHC 3709 (Ch)

A partnership business does not cease on dissolution. Former partners have a right to enter partnership premises and participate in the winding up of the business unless the court appoints a receiver [9].

10/11/14

SINGULARIS HOLDINGS LTD v PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS [2014] UKPC 36, [2015] 1 AC 1675

The court can order production of information necessary for the administration of a foreign winding-up but will not do so if the local court with jurisdiction in the winding-up has no equivalent power.

5/11/14

AIB GROUP (UK) PLC v MARK REDLER & CO SOLICITORS [2014] UKSC 58

Solicitors had committed a breach of trust in relation to a remortgage advance by releasing the funds without having an undertaking from to a third party to discharge an existing charge, and without having held back sufficient funds for that purpose. As a commercial matter and in practical terms the transaction had completed when the loan monies were released. In those circumstances in calculating equitable compensation it was right to take into account the fact the lender had obtained a second mortgage and the sum awarded to the lender was rightly limited to the sum wrongly paid to the borrower which should have been used to discharge the third party’s prior charge.

4/11/14

UBS AG v KOMMUNALE WASSERWERKE LEIPZIG GMBH [2014] EWHC 3615 (Comm)

Considers the legal principles for setting aside contracts on grounds of bribery of agents [587], conflict of interest on the part of an agent [621], attribution of an agent’s knowledge to a company [628], fraudulent misrepresentation [642], contractual estoppel [773] and rescission [783].