Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC v PSI Energy Holding Company BSC & Ors [2013] EWHC 3186 (Comm) (23 October 2013)

Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC v PSI Energy Holding Company BSC & Ors [2013] EWHC 3186 (Comm) (23 October 2013)

The discharge of a debt governed by English law is determined by English law, not by the law governing the security or the lex situs. The taking of possession of security by the creditor does not extinguish the debt unless the security is realised. The proposed amendments to plead discharge under UAE/Dubai law do not give rise to an arguable defence and are refused. The expert evidence on UAE/Dubai law is irrelevant and inadmissible.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3186 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC; First Defendant: PSI Energy Holding Company BSC; Second Defendant: Ryan Cornelius; Third Defendant: Charles Ridley; Fourth Defendant: Eren Nil; Fifth Defendant: CCH Europe GmbH
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (debt Recovery) / Interlocutory Application (application to Amend Defences and Adduce Expert Evidence)
Outcome
Applications refused
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Security, Governing Law of Contract, Discharge of Debt, Late Amendments to Pleadings, Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Commercial Law Conflict of Laws Banking Law Enforcement of Security Governing Law of Contract Discharge of Debt Late Amendments to Pleadings Admissibility of Expert Evidence

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC

Claimant

PSI Energy Holding Company BSC

First Defendant

Ryan Cornelius

Second Defendant

Charles Ridley

Third Defendant

Eren Nil

Fourth Defendant

CCH Europe GmbH

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (debt Recovery) / Interlocutory Application (application to Amend Defences and Adduce Expert Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants may amend their defences to plead discharge of debt under UAE/Dubai law
  2. 2 Whether expert evidence on UAE/Dubai law is admissible and relevant
  3. 3 Whether taking possession of security extinguishes debt under English law

Ratio Decidendi

The discharge of a debt governed by English law is determined by English law, not by the law governing the security or the lex situs. The taking of possession of security by the creditor does not extinguish the debt unless the security is realised. The proposed amendments to plead discharge under UAE/Dubai law do not give rise to an arguable defence and are refused. The expert evidence on UAE/Dubai law is irrelevant and inadmissible.

Court Disposition

Applications refused

Orders

  • Application by second and third defendants to amend their defences is refused.
  • Application to adduce expert evidence of Dr Makkawi is refused.