Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors v Natwest Markets Plc & Anor [2020] EWHC 546 (Ch) (10 March 2020)

Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors v Natwest Markets Plc & Anor [2020] EWHC 546 (Ch) (10 March 2020)

The court found insufficient evidence that the traders at RBS SEEL had actual knowledge or suspicion amounting to dishonesty regarding VAT fraud in trading with CarbonDesk. Compliance procedures were followed, concerns were raised and investigated, and trading ceased when risks were substantiated. The claim for dishonest assistance and knowing participation in fraudulent trading was not made out on the facts. Claims relating to trading with GW Deals were dismissed due to lack of evidence and clarity.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 546 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Bilta (UK) Limited (in liquidation) and others; First Defendant: NatWest Markets plc; Second Defendant: Mercuria Energy Europe Trading Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Fraud Claim / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Dishonest Assistance, Fraudulent Trading, MTIC Fraud, VAT Fraud, Carbon Emissions Trading, Joint and Several Liability, Section 213 Insolvency Act 1986
Commercial Law Insolvency Law Fraud Banking Law Dishonest Assistance Fraudulent Trading MTIC Fraud VAT Fraud +3 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bilta (UK) Limited (in liquidation) and others

Claimant

NatWest Markets plc

First Defendant

Mercuria Energy Europe Trading Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Fraud Claim / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RBS and RBS SEEL dishonestly assisted breaches of fiduciary duty by directors of Claimant companies
  2. 2 Whether RBS and RBS SEEL knowingly participated in fraudulent trading under Section 213 Insolvency Act 1986
  3. 3 Whether the traders at RBS SEEL had sufficient knowledge or suspicion of VAT fraud to constitute dishonesty

Ratio Decidendi

The court found insufficient evidence that the traders at RBS SEEL had actual knowledge or suspicion amounting to dishonesty regarding VAT fraud in trading with CarbonDesk. Compliance procedures were followed, concerns were raised and investigated, and trading ceased when risks were substantiated. The claim for dishonest assistance and knowing participation in fraudulent trading was not made out on the facts. Claims relating to trading with GW Deals were dismissed due to lack of evidence and clarity.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimants' case in relation to trading with CarbonDesk and GW Deals dismissed
  • No order as to compensation under Section 213 Insolvency Act 1986