Ardila Investments NV v ENRC NV & Anor [2015] EWHC 1667 (Comm) (11 June 2015)

Ardila Investments NV v ENRC NV & Anor [2015] EWHC 1667 (Comm) (11 June 2015)

The assignment to RBC was equitable, not legal, so both Ardila and RBC could sue; ENRC was entitled to summary judgment for US$65 million loan plus interest, repayable without set-off, as the Port Installation Licence was not issued by the relevant date; anti-suit injunction was justified as the Curacao attachment was a vexatious interference with English proceedings; security for costs was appropriate given Ardila's impecuniosity and the independent vitality of ENRC's counterclaim; ENRC's pleadings should not be struck out as the issues were triable and required determination at trial.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1667 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Ardila Investments NV; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: ENRC NV; Third Party: Zamin Ferrous Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim (payment Obligations Under Spa, Counterclaims, and Related Applications) / Interlocutory Applications Prior to Trial
Outcome
Applications determined as follows: RBC joined as co-claimant; ENRC's strike out application refused; summary judgment for ENRC on US$65 million loan plus interest; anti-suit injunction granted; security for costs ordered against Ardila; Ardila's strike out application refused.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Receivables, Summary Judgment, Set Off, Security for Costs, Anti Suit Injunctions, Strike Out Applications, Interpretation of Contracts
Commercial Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Assignment of Receivables Summary Judgment Set Off Security for Costs Anti Suit Injunctions +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ardila Investments NV

Claimant

ENRC NV

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Zamin Ferrous Ltd

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim (payment Obligations Under Spa, Counterclaims, and Related Applications) / Interlocutory Applications Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether assignment to RBC was legal or equitable and effect on standing to sue
  2. 2 Whether ENRC entitled to summary judgment for US$65 million loan repayment without set-off
  3. 3 Whether anti-suit injunction should be granted to restrain Curacao attachment

Ratio Decidendi

The assignment to RBC was equitable, not legal, so both Ardila and RBC could sue; ENRC was entitled to summary judgment for US$65 million loan plus interest, repayable without set-off, as the Port Installation Licence was not issued by the relevant date; anti-suit injunction was justified as the Curacao attachment was a vexatious interference with English proceedings; security for costs was appropriate given Ardila's impecuniosity and the independent vitality of ENRC's counterclaim; ENRC's pleadings should not be struck out as the issues were triable and required determination at trial.

Court Disposition

Applications determined as follows: RBC joined as co-claimant; ENRC's strike out application refused; summary judgment for ENRC on US$65 million loan plus interest; anti-suit injunction granted; security for costs ordered against Ardila; Ardila's strike out application refused.

Orders

  • RBC joined as co-claimant; leave to amend and serve pleadings.
  • ENRC's strike out application refused.