Commercial update: No banker's duty to advise customer of harsh terms in its loans
6th July 2016
Does a bank who is negotiating with a customer for a sale of a financial product, owe a common law duty to advise the client about an onerous break clause? Tom Webb analyses a recent decision of the Mercantile Court that considers the scope of a banker’s duty (Fitch v. Lloyds TSB Bank plc [2016] EWHC 1236 (QB)).
Tom is a Commercial Law barrister who regularly advises in business disputes.
Related News
-
3PB Barristers’ (3 Paper Buildings) specialist criminal law barrister, Holly Fagan, has successfully secured an acquittal for her client, accused of causing grievous bodily harm with intent. Holly’s client, K, became involved in a fight in the street after a confrontation started between males she was with. It was alleged that K participated in the fight by bottling the Complainant and causing him grievous bodily harm. The Prosecution put their case in multiple ways. They said...
Continue reading -
3PB’s Anthony Bingham is a regularly contributor and has written for Building Magazine titled ‘Let’s sort out the payment rules’. The article criticises the payment rules in the Construction Act, arguing that they are overly complex and full of legal technicalities that create pitfalls for contractors. It highlights the recent case of Placefirst Construction Ltd vs CAR Construction (North East) Ltd, decided in the Technology and Construction Court on 24 January, as an example of...
Continue reading -
3PB's crime and regulatory specialist counsel Nicholas Cotter advised his client Sam Farrow, who was captain of the 3,500-tonne cargo ship Scot Carrier, who was facing charges in this complex maritime case. Two Danish sailors, Erik Jensen and Per Hartmann Christensen, on a Danish barge died after the Scot Carrier collided with it and their 180-ft Karin Hoj capsized in the Baltic Sea, off the southern coast of Sweden. Sam Farrow was prosecuted because he...
Continue reading -
3PB’s Robin Pickard is being led by Karon Monaghan KC in an appeal being heard by the Court of Appeal tomorrow, 28 January 2025 in the case of Moustache v Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. The appeal raises points of law of public importance as to the Employment Tribunal’s need to clarify the claims of unrepresented parties and the status of lists of issues. The decision is likely to have important implications for...
Continue reading
