The director sought a further judgment as to whether charges imposed by banks on a customer taking an unauthorised overdraft, and otherwise were unlawful penalties.
References: [2008] EWHC 2325 (Comm)
Links: Bailii
Judges: Andrew Smith J
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:
- See Also – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008 (, [2008] EWHC 875 (Comm), Times 29-Apr-08, Gazette 08-May-05, [2008] 2 All ER (Comm) 625)
The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . . - Cited – Wallersteiner v Moir CA 1974 ([1974] 1 WLR 991)
The making of a declaration is a judicial act. A shareholder is entitled to bring a derivative action on behalf of the company when it is controlled by persons alleged to have injured the company who refuse to allow the company to sue. It is an . . - Cited – Cooden Engineering Co Ltd v Stanford CA 1953 ([1953] 1 QB 86, [1952] 2 All ER 915)
A payment to be made on a wrongful termination of a lease by a tenant, will attract consideration of the law of penalties, for notwithstanding the requirement for acceptance of it, the amount to be paid is, ‘plainly a sum to be paid in consequence . . - Cited – Jervis v Harris CA 9-Nov-1995 (Ind Summary 04-Dec-95, Gazette 24-Jan-96, Times 14-Nov-95, , [1995] EWCA Civ 9, [1996] Ch 195, [1996] 2 WLR 220, [1996] 1 All ER 303, [1996] 1 EGLR 78, [1996] 10 EG 159)
A provision in the lease obliged a tenant to carry out repairs and provided that if he did not do so, the landlord might do the repairs and recover from the tenant the costs and expenses of doing so.
Held: The provision was not a penalty. The . .
This case is cited by:
- See Also – Abbey National Plc and others v The Office of Fair Trading CA 26-Feb-2009 (, [2009] EWCA Civ 116, Times 03-Mar-09, [2009] 2 CMLR 30, [2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 1097, [2009] 2 WLR 1286)
The OFT had sought to enquire as to the fairness of the terms on which banks conducted their accounts with consumers, and in particular as to how they charged for unauthorised overdrafts. The banks denied that the OFT had jurisdiction, and now . . - See also – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and others ComC 21-Jan-2009 (, [2009] EWHC 36 (Comm))
. . - See also – Office of Fair Trading (OFT) v Abbey National Plc and Others SC 25-Nov-2009 (, [2009] UKSC 6, Times 26-Nov-09, [2009] 3 WLR 1215)
The banks appealed against a ruling that the OFT could investigate the fairness or otherwise of their systems for charging bank customers for non-agreed items as excessive relative to the services supplied. The banks said that regulation 6(2) could . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.277032
