Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Highland Financial Partners LP

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeMaurice Kay,Toulson,Aikens L JJ
Judgment Date12 April 2013
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
Date12 April 2013
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
64 cases
  • Balber Kaur Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 6 May 2015
    ...judgments for fraud were summarised in these terms by Aikens LJ (with whom Maurice Kay and Toulson LJJ agreed) in Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Highland Financial Partners LP [2013] EWCA Civ 328, [2013] 1 CLC 596 (at paragraph 106): "There was no dispute between counsel before us on the leg......
  • Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation and Others v Privalov and Others (No 2)
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 26 August 2016
    ...aside and that the relevant principles for the exercise of this jurisdiction are those summarised by Aikens LJ in Royal Bank of Scotland plc v. Highland Financial Partners LP [2013] EWCA Civ 328, [2013] 1 CLC 596 at [106]: "The principles are, briefly: first, there has to be a 'conscious ......
  • Grove Park Properties Ltd v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 18 December 2018
    ...defence is of limited scope, as Aikens LJ explained in Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Highland Financial Partners LP [2013] EWCA Civ 328, [2013] 1 CLC 596 at [159]: “It was common ground that the scope of the ‘unclean hands’ doctrine is limited. To paraphrase the words of Lord Chief Baron Ey......
  • Kevin Taylor v Mohammed Khodabakhsh
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 23 March 2021
    ...an application to set aside a judgment for fraud are those set out by Aikens LJ in Royal Bank of Scotland v Highland Financial Partners [2013] 1 CLC 596 (“ Highland Financial”) at [106] and approved by the Supreme Court in Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd [2020] AC 450 (“ Takhar”) at [5......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT