header-logo header-logo

11 November 2016
Issue: 7722 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Bank

Darby Properties Ltd and another v Lloyds Bank plc [2016] EWHC 2494 (Ch), [2016] All ER (D) 92 (Sep)

The Chancery Division considered the admissibility of expert evidence in a claim brought against the defendant, alleging breach of contract, negligence and/or misrepresentation in respect of advice, recommendations, explanations and/or information provided by the bank in connection with certain interest rate derivative products. The court held that, notwithstanding the complex nature of the products concerned, which could be described to the judge in a factual way, and thus not requiring permission, it was not actually necessary, on any of the issues in the present case, for there to be expert evidence.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
The controversial Mazur ruling, which caused widespread uncertainty about the role of non-solicitors in litigation work, has been overturned on appeal
Two landmark social media cases in the US could influence social media regulation in the UK, lawyers predict
Barristers have urged the government to set up Nightingale-style specialist courts, with jury trials, to prioritise rape, sexual assault and domestic abuse trials
Victims of violent crimes who suffer life-changing injuries receive less than half the financial support today than those in the 1990s, according to a senior personal injury lawyer
Rising numbers of cases, an increase in litigants in person and an overall lack of investment is piling pressure on the family court, the Law Society has warned
back-to-top-scroll