The plaintiff sought to have the bank’s form of debenture deemed anti-competitive under the treaty and void.
Held: The bank’s security finished when the sums due were repaid. It was not a clog on the equity of redemption. A provision against the freedom to give a second charge was appropriate because the charge was a continuing one securing an overdraft. A second charge would take priority over subsequent advances under the debenture. It was also necessary for the bank to take control of the collection of book debts to avoid that part of the charge being a floating charge. The provisions were reasonable and not anti-competitive. The arguments had no prospect of success and leave to appeal was refused.
Citations:
Times 20-Aug-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 568
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Gottrup-Klim v Danks Landbrugs Grovvaresekskab AmbA ECJ 1994
‘agreements capable of performing a more complex function will not be regarded as having an anti-competitive object. That applies to clauses which form an integral part of a contract and in that way contribute to defining the basis and the balance . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Company, Banking, European
Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.140435
