Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd ((in Liquidation)) v Habib Bank Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Chancery Division |
| Judgment Date | 24 June 1998 |
| Date | 24 June 1998 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
20 cases
-
Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees Sa (in Its Capacity as The Trustee of The Tchenguiz Discretionary Trust) v Kaupthing Bank Hf (Defendant/Applicant)
...way the matter was primarily put was said to be by reference to the decision in BCCI (Overseas) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Habib Bank Ltd [1999] 1 WLR 42, a case which was said to found a submission that it would be an abuse for the claimants to pursue their claims in this country while having ......
- Witech Sdn Bhd v BHR Group Ltd
-
Mercurine Pte Ltd v Canberra Development Pte Ltd
...for instance, by admitting its liability under that judgment (see, eg, the decision of the English High Court in BCCI v Habib Bank [1999] 1 WLR 42). With regard to the defendant’s undue delay (if any) in filing its setting-aside application (see item (c) above), we would reiterate that such......
-
Cooperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank BA (trading as Rabobank International), Singapore Branch v Motorola Electronics Pte Ltd
...to C, even if B and C are related companies: Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Habib Bank Ltd [1999] 1 WLR 42. Prima facie, as the plaintiff argued, there was no mutuality between the debt owed by the defendant to JHT and the debt owed by JHT to MTC......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
LAST FLIGHT OF THE EAGLE: NEW PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE SETTING ASIDE OF JUDGMENTS IN DEFAULT
...150 As pointed out by the Court of Appeal at [2008] 4 SLR 907 at [98]. 151 [2008] 4 SLR 907 at [92], [98]. 152 See BCCI v Habib Bank[1999] 1 WLR 42, in which an irregular judgment was not set aside because the defendant admitted liability. Although Faircharm is not mentioned in the judgment......