Bank
Promontoria (Oak) Ltd v Emanuel and another [2019] EWHC 2896 (Ch), [2019] All ER (D) 93 (Nov)
The respondent company had claimed, as the assignee of Clydesdale Bank (the bank), debts owed to the bank by the appellants. The claim had succeeded on the basis of secondary evidence regarding the assignment, namely a redacted assignment deed. The appellants were granted permission to appeal on three out of six grounds of appeal. The Chancery Division dismissed their applications: (i) to admit new evidence; and (ii) to introduce a seventh ground of appeal. The court ruled that, given that ground 7 involved a contention that the judgment on the claim had been obtained by fraud, it had to be pursued by what would, in substance, be separate action. Further, the court held that the ‘new’ material that the appellants sought to adduce did not come close to meeting the requirement in authority that, if it had been adduced at trial, that evidence would have had an important influence on the result of the case.
Company
Re
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
