header-logo header-logo

Contract

08 August 2014
Issue: 7618 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Lehman Brothers Finance S.A. (in Liquidation) v Sal Oppenhim jr. & cir. KGaA [2014] EWHC 2627 (Comm), [2014] All ER (D) 309 (Jul)

It was settled law that the identification of the non-defaulting party’s loss of bargain, arising from the termination of a derivative transaction, required a “clean” rather than a “dirty” market valuation of the lost transaction. That meant that the loss of bargain had to be valued on an assumption that, but for termination, the transaction would have proceeded to a conclusion, and that all conditions to its full performance by both sides would have been satisfied, however improbable that assumption might be in the real world. Thus, for the “value clean principle”, the conditions precedent as to payment, among other things, had to be deemed to have been satisfied. Otherwise no replacement transaction could be entered into, as there would be nothing to transfer to the new party, or only a transaction capable of being immediately terminated. The quotation was to be given for the replacement transaction on that basis. Quotations for replacement transactions were required

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll