Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank v British Bank of Foreign Trade: HL 1921

The court considered how the court should exercise any jurisdiction to make declarations.
Held: The House (Lord Dunedin) referred, with approval, to the approach taken by the Scottish Courts, identifying three propositions, namely that the question must be real and not a theoretical question; the person raising it must have a real interest to raise it; and he must be able to secure a proper contradictor ie someone presently existing who has a true interest to oppose the declaration sought.
Lord Dunedin spoke of the Scottish action of declarator: ‘The rules that have been elucidated by a long course of decisions in the Scottish courts may be summarized thus: The question must be a real and not a theoretical question; the person raising it must have a real interest to raise it; he must be able to secure a proper contradictor, that is to say, someone presently existing who has a true interest to oppose the declaration sought.’
References: [1921] 2 AC 438
Judges: Lord Dunedin
Jurisdiction: Scotland
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Point Solutions Ltd v Focus Business Solutions Ltd and Another ChD 16-Dec-2005 (, [2005] EWHC 3096 (Ch))
    It was claimed that the defendant’s computer software infringed the copyright in software owned by the claimant. A declaration was sought beacause of allegations that assertions about infringement had been made to third parties.
    Held: The . .
  • Approved – Vine v National Dock Labour Board HL 1957 ([1957] AC 488, [1956] 1 QB 658, [1956] 3 All ER 939, [1957] 2 WLR 106)
    The plaintiff was employed under a statutory scheme for the employment of dock labourers. He appealed against a finding that the rules on dismissal contained within the scheme were not the only ones appertaining.
    Held: (reversing the majority . .
  • Cited – F v West Berkshire Health Authority HL 17-Jul-1990 ([1990] 2 AC 1, , [1991] UKHL 1)
    The parties considered the propriety of a sterilisation of a woman who was, through mental incapacity, unable to give her consent.
    Held: The appeal succeeded, and the operation would be lawful if the doctor considered it to be in the best . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.237717