Adibe v National Westminster Bank Plc

Adibe v National Westminster Bank Plc

There was a real prospect of success that a collateral contract existed obliging the Bank to mark the claimant’s credit file as settled, based on the conditional nature of the settlement offer and the Bank’s acceptance. The Tomlin order did not necessarily exclude antecedent oral terms, and summary judgment was inappropriate on the pleaded case. Permission to appeal was granted and the appeal allowed on this limited point.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Pius Aloysius Adibe; Defendant/appellant: National Westminster Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment/strike Out
Outcome
Appeal allowed; permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Collateral Contract, Entire Agreement, Summary Judgment, Rectification, Credit File Amendment
Contract Law Banking Law Credit Reporting Collateral Contract Entire Agreement Summary Judgment Rectification Credit File Amendment

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pius Aloysius Adibe

Claimant/respondent

National Westminster Bank PLC

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment/strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a collateral contract or part oral/part written contract obliging the Bank to mark the claimant's credit file as settled upon payment of the settlement sum
  2. 2 Whether the Tomlin order represented the entire agreement between the parties, excluding any collateral or antecedent oral terms
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was appropriate on the pleaded case

Ratio Decidendi

There was a real prospect of success that a collateral contract existed obliging the Bank to mark the claimant’s credit file as settled, based on the conditional nature of the settlement offer and the Bank’s acceptance. The Tomlin order did not necessarily exclude antecedent oral terms, and summary judgment was inappropriate on the pleaded case. Permission to appeal was granted and the appeal allowed on this limited point.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; permission to appeal granted

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted on the limited point advanced by the claimant
  • Appeal allowed; summary judgment set aside on the issue of the collateral contract