Barclays Bank Plc v Sutton [2015] EWHC 3192 (QB) (06 November 2015)

Barclays Bank Plc v Sutton [2015] EWHC 3192 (QB) (06 November 2015)

There was a concluded agreement for the transfer of the overdraft from CSF to PFL, dependent on the bank being satisfied with security. The guarantee signed by the defendant was enforceable even if all security was not in place. There was no evidence of a concluded agreement for a fixed term loan. The defendant had no real prospect of defending the claim or succeeding in the counterclaim.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 3192
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Barclays Bank PLC; Defendant/appellant: Mr Clive Jeremy Sutton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Strike Out of Defence/counterclaim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Guarantees, Summary Judgment, Personal Liability, Security for Loans
Contract Law Banking Law Guarantees Summary Judgment Personal Liability Security for Loans

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barclays Bank PLC

Claimant/respondent

Mr Clive Jeremy Sutton

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Strike Out of Defence/counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a concluded agreement for a fixed term loan between the parties
  2. 2 Whether the bank was entitled to enforce the personal guarantee against the defendant
  3. 3 Whether the transfer of the overdraft from CSF to PFL was valid and enforceable

Ratio Decidendi

There was a concluded agreement for the transfer of the overdraft from CSF to PFL, dependent on the bank being satisfied with security. The guarantee signed by the defendant was enforceable even if all security was not in place. There was no evidence of a concluded agreement for a fixed term loan. The defendant had no real prospect of defending the claim or succeeding in the counterclaim.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment for the claimant
  • Defence and counterclaim struck out