Barclays Bank Plc v Ente Nazionale Di Previdenza Ed Assistenza Dei Medici E Degli Odontoiatri [2016] EWCA Civ 1261 (08 December 2016)

Barclays Bank Plc v Ente Nazionale Di Previdenza Ed Assistenza Dei Medici E Degli Odontoiatri [2016] EWCA Civ 1261 (08 December 2016)

The Milan and London proceedings did not involve the same cause of action or object under Article 27 of the Judgments Regulation, as the factual and legal bases and relief sought were different. The English court was not bound to stay its proceedings and was entitled to grant summary judgment for breach of the jurisdiction clauses. Granting summary judgment did not infringe the EU principle of mutual trust.

Citation
[2016] EWCA Civ 1261
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Barclays Bank Plc; Defendant/appellant: Ente Nazionale di Previdenza ed Assistenza dei Medici e degli Odontoiatri (ENPAM)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Dismissal of Jurisdiction Challenge
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Clauses, Summary Judgment, Brussels Regulation (judgments Regulation), Mutual Trust Between EU Courts, Tort Claims in Contract Context
Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Commercial Law Jurisdiction Clauses Summary Judgment Brussels Regulation (judgments Regulation) Mutual Trust Between EU Courts Tort Claims in Contract Context

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barclays Bank Plc

Claimant/respondent

Ente Nazionale di Previdenza ed Assistenza dei Medici e degli Odontoiatri (ENPAM)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Dismissal of Jurisdiction Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether English proceedings and Milan proceedings involve the same cause of action under Article 27 of the Judgments Regulation
  2. 2 Whether the English court should stay proceedings under Article 27 or 28 of the Judgments Regulation
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment in favour of Barclays infringes the EU principle of mutual trust

Ratio Decidendi

The Milan and London proceedings did not involve the same cause of action or object under Article 27 of the Judgments Regulation, as the factual and legal bases and relief sought were different. The English court was not bound to stay its proceedings and was entitled to grant summary judgment for breach of the jurisdiction clauses. Granting summary judgment did not infringe the EU principle of mutual trust.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; summary judgment for Barclays Bank Plc stands; no stay of English proceedings.