Appeal from a decision to grant the defendant bank summary judgment in respect of certain of the claimants’ claims. The result of the judgment is that the claimants can pursue a claim in deceit and contend that such claim is neither time-barred nor precluded by anti-set off provisions in their contract with the bank. No other claim is permissible. That is because it is arguable that the time for a deceit claim (as opposed to claims for negligent advice or breach of statutory duty) is extended pursuant to section 32 of the 1980 Act and that the anti-set off provisions may be unreasonable clauses within the relevant statutory provisions, on which the bank may not rely.
Judges:
Longmore, Leggatt LJJ
Citations:
[2018] EWCA Civ 1103
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Boyse (International) Ltd v Natwest Markets Plc and Another ChD 27-May-2020
Claim alleging misselling of interest rate hedging products. The court considered the defendants strike out application, and applications for leave to amend pleadings.
Held: it will normally be appropriate for summary judgment to be pursued on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Banking, Limitation, Contract, Torts – Other
Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.616341
