Ardila Investments NV v ENRC NV & Anor

Ardila Investments NV v ENRC NV & Anor

The assignment from Ardila to RBC was by way of security and not an absolute legal assignment; thus, both Ardila and RBC could be co-claimants. The US$65 million loan was repayable by Ardila without set-off, as the contractual conditions for set-off were not met. ENRC was entitled to summary judgment for the loan and interest. Ardila's Curacao attachment was a vexatious interference with the English proceedings and was restrained by anti-suit injunction. ENRC was entitled to security for costs against Ardila. ENRC's pleadings raised triable issues and were not struck out.

Parties
Claimant: Ardila Investments NV; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: ENRC NV; Third Party: Zamin Ferrous Ltd; Additional Claimant (joined by Amendment): Royal Bank of Canada (Channel Islands) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Interlocutory Applications Ruling
Outcome
Applications allowed in part and refused in part; summary judgment for ENRC on loan claim; anti-suit injunction granted; security for costs ordered; amendments and joinder allowed; strike out refused.
Legal Topics
Assignment of Receivables, Security for Costs, Summary Judgment, Anti Suit Injunction, Strike Out Applications, Set Off Clauses, Implied Contractual Terms
Commercial Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Assignment of Receivables Security for Costs Summary Judgment Anti Suit Injunction Strike Out Applications +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 5 Authorities cited 17 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

Royal Bank of Canada (Channel Islands) Limited

Additional Claimant (joined by Amendment)

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Interlocutory Applications Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assignment from Ardila to RBC was legal or equitable and its effect on standing to sue
  2. 2 Whether ENRC is entitled to summary judgment for repayment of US$65 million loan without set-off
  3. 3 Whether Ardila's Curacao attachment proceedings should be restrained by anti-suit injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The assignment from Ardila to RBC was by way of security and not an absolute legal assignment; thus, both Ardila and RBC could be co-claimants. The US$65 million loan was repayable by Ardila without set-off, as the contractual conditions for set-off were not met. ENRC was entitled to summary judgment for the loan and interest. Ardila's Curacao attachment was a vexatious interference with the English proceedings and was restrained by anti-suit injunction. ENRC was entitled to security for costs against Ardila. ENRC's pleadings raised triable issues and were not struck out.

Court Disposition

Applications allowed in part and refused in part; summary judgment for ENRC on loan claim; anti-suit injunction granted; security for costs ordered; amendments and joinder allowed; strike out refused.

Orders

  • RBC joined as co-claimant; leave to amend claim form and particulars granted.
  • ENRC's strike out application refused.