header-logo header-logo

18 September 2008 / Stuart Mcneill
Issue: 7337 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

An expensive fight

Banks cannot afford to lose their battle with the OFT over bank charges, says Stuart McNeill

In April this year judgment was handed down in the first part of the eagerly awaited test case brought by the OFT against the UK's leading high street banks seeking a ruling on the fairness of their unauthorised overdraft charges (Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National plc and others [2008] EWHC 875 (Comm), [2008] All ER (D) 349 (Apr)). Eight banks had asked the OFT to bring the test case, partly to limit the huge number of cases that were being taken by aggrieved customers in county courts all over the UK—which were stayed pending the decision—and partly to try to bring certainty to a revenue stream estimated to gross them around £2.6bn in 2006. Although the initial press coverage suggests that the OFT was successful, this is only part of the story.

The test case

The test case sought a ruling on whether the charges, both historical and current, were: (i) caught by the Unfair Terms

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll