Compagnie Commerciale Andre Sa v Artibell Shipping Company Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 21 February 2001 |
| Date | 21 February 2001 |
| Docket Number | No 51 |
| Court | Court of Session (Outer House) |
OUTER HOUSE
Lord Macfadyen
Contract—Construction—Assignation in loan documentation between bank and customer—Whether assignation an absolute assignation or simply an assignation in security—Whether bank received sum advanced for their own account or in their capacity as customer's bankers
Trust—Constructive trust—Sums paid into bank accounts under agreement where consideration for the payment ultimately failed—Whether English Law would hold that constructive trust had arisen
Unjustified enrichment—Repetition—Condictio causa data causa non secuta—Tripartite arrangement—Payment of advance freight under charterparty made by charterers to ship owners' bank—Voyage abandoned—Whether bank enriched—Whether contemplated event which had failed required to be the provision of a consideration by the bank rather than the ship owners—Whether matter regulated by contract—Whether equitable to order repayment
The pursuers chartered a vessel from its owners, the first defenders, to carry a cargo of sugar from Rouen to Umm Qasr in Iraq. The voyage was abandoned and decree was granted against the first defenders in respect of their breach of contract. Thereafter the pursuers sought recovery of various sums from the second defenders, the first defenders' bankers. The pursuers sought repetition of a sum of advance freight payable by the pursuers under the charterparty to the first defenders, the sum having been paid to the credit of an account with the second defenders, under the condictio causa data causa non secuta. Alternatively, the pursuers sought declarator that certain sums standing to the credit of the first defenders in accounts with the second defenders were the property of the pursuers, on the grounds of constructive trust. They sought repayment of a further sum withdrawn by the second defenders from an account of the first defenders on the same basis. In support of the claim for repetition the pursuers argued that loan documentation between the defenders effected an absolute assignation of the right to the advance freight in favour of the second defenders, so that the second defenders received the advance freight credited to the first defenders' account for their own benefit. The pursuers argued further that it was not essential that the contemplated event, failure of which gave rise to their claim for reversal of unjust enrichment against the second defenders, should be the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The High Commissioner for Pakistan in the United Kingdom v Prince Mukarram Jah, His Exalted Highness the 8th Nizam of Hyderabad
...that regard, see Box v. Barclays Bank plc, [1998] Lloyd's Rep Bank 185 and Compagnie Commercial Andre SA v. Artibell Shipping Co Ltd, [2001] SC 653, Court of Session, Outer House at [16] per Lord Macfadyn). The Claimants' proper unjust enrichment claim is against SEWL, whose assets were in......
-
The High Commissioner for Pakistan in the United Kingdom v Prince Mukkaram Jah, His Exalted Highness the 8th Nizam of Hyderabad and Others (Defendants/Interpleader Claimants) National Westminster Bank Plc (Defendant/Stakeholder)
...(in that regard see Box v Barclays Bank Plc [1998] Lloyd's Rep Bank 185 and Compagnie Commercial Andre SA v Artibell Shipping Co Ltd 2001 SC 653, Court of Session, Outer House, at [16] per Lord Macfadyn). The Claimants' proper unjust enrichment claim is against SEWL, whose assets were incre......
-
Jeremy D. Stone Consultants Ltd and Another v National Westminster Bank Plc and Another
...(in that regard see Box v Barclays Bank Plc [1998] Lloyd's Rep. Bank. 185 and Compagnie Commercial Andre SA v Artibell Shipping Co. Ltd 2001 SC 653, Court of Session, Outer House, at [16] per Lord Macfadyn). The Claimants' proper unjust enrichment claim is against SEWL, whose assets were in......
-
Pert v McCaffrey
...Ltd 1923 SC (HL) 105; 1923 SLT 624; [1924] AC 226; (1923) 16 Ll L Rep 327 Compagnie Commerciale Andre SA v Artibell Shipping Co Ltd (No 2) 2001 SC 653; 2001 GWD 8–307 Courtney's Exrs v Campbell [2016] CSOH 136; 2017 SCLR 387; 2016 GWD 31–564 Dollar Land (Cumbernauld) Ltd v CIN Properties Lt......
-
Payment of Another's Debt, Unjustified Enrichment and ad hoc Agency
...he establishes that it would be inequitable for the court to compel redress.6565Compagnie Commerciale Andre SA v Artibell Shipping Co Ltd 2001 SC 653 at 668I-669A per Lord Macfadyen. It is submitted that this test has superseded the older and less authoritative five-point Varney test of lia......