Each party sought summary judgment.
Held: Popplewell J granted Tael’s application and dismissed Morgan Stanley’s. The payment premium was similar to interest and performed an analogous function. The cost of the borrowing was more than the interest of 11.25% per annum, but only that amount required to be paid out of cash flow three monthly in arrears. The remainder of the cost of borrowing was deferred and became payable, in the form of the payment premium, whenever the loan was repaid to a particular lender or all the lenders. The payment premium was therefore part of the consideration for the loan, and was calculated by reference to the period for which the borrower had the use of the money in just the same way as was the entitlement to ‘interest’ described as such.
Judges:
Popplewell J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 1858 (Comm)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
At first instance – Tael One Partners Ltd v Morgan Stanley and Co International Plc SC 11-Mar-2015
This appeal raises a question of contractual interpretation. Its significance lies in the fact that the contractual condition in question forms part of the Loan Market Association standard terms and conditions for par trade transactions which are a . .
At First Instance – Tael One Partners Ltd v Morgan Stanley and Co International Plc CA 1-May-2013
Morgan Stanley appealed against summary judgment given against it in respect of the application of the terms of a standard form assignment of a Loan agreement.
Held: The words ‘which are expressed to accrue by reference to the lapse of time’, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Financial Services
Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.462428