A bank paid money to a local authority under an interest rate swap agreement, which was held later to be outside the local authority’s powers.
Held: The local authority was to repay the money paid to it for an ultra vires purpose (a swap transaction) with compound interest. It was repayable under the equitable principle of restitution.
Gazette 23-Feb-1994, Independent 05-Jan-1994, Times 30-Dec-1993,  4 All ER 890,  1 WLR 938
England and Wales
- Appeal from – Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council; Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Sandwell Borough Council ChD 23-Feb-1993
A bank, having made payment under an void interest rate swap agreement to a local authority, was entitled to recover the payments made under the equitable doctrine of restitution. It would be wrong to allow the local authorities to enjoy an unjust . .
Independent 25-Feb-93, Times 23-Feb-93,  4 All ER 890
- Appeal from – Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council HL 22-May-1996
Simple interest only on rate swap damages
The bank had paid money to the local authority under a contract which turned out to be ultra vires and void. The question was whether, in addition to ordering the repayment of the money to the bank on unjust enrichment principles, the court could . .
Times 30-May-96,  2 All ER 961,  AC 669,  UKHL 12,  2 WLR 802,  5 Bank LR 341
- Cited – Stretch v West Dorset District Council CA 10-Nov-1997
A local authority has no ability to grant an option to renew a lease, even though it has the power to grant a lease and would benefit from the wrongful grant. The land was held for an express statutory purpose and was not ‘corporate land’ within the . .
Gazette 03-Dec-97, Times 27-Nov-97,  EWCA Civ 2692, (1998) 77 PandCR 342
- Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent of its property . .
Gazette 18-Sep-03, Times 11-Jul-03,  UKHL 40,  3 WLR 568,  1 AC 816,  2 All ER (Comm) 491,  HRLR 33,  UKHRR 1085,  4 All ER 97
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 December 2020; Ref: scu.90408