Crimpfil Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc: CA 16 Feb 1995

The bank appealed against an interim award of a substantial sum for damages for having arbitrarily withdrawn the plaintiff’s loan facilities.
Held: The judge had heard the evidence and considered it, and was entitled to take his own view, even though substantial questions might arise at trial. The rules gave him a wide discretion which had exercised carefully and fairly. Interim damages will usually limited to what was certain to be recovered, but this was not specified to be so in the court rules.
Nourse LJ, Waite LJ, Sir Tasker Watkins
Times 24-Feb-1995, Ind Summary 27-Mar-1995, [1995] CLC 385
Rules of the Supreme Court O.29
England and Wales

Updated: 02 June 2021; Ref: scu.79671