Allianz Global Investors GmbH & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors [2021] EWHC 399 (Comm) (25 February 2021)

Allianz Global Investors GmbH & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors [2021] EWHC 399 (Comm) (25 February 2021)

The court determined that, under English law, beneficiaries, former shareholders, and former partners may have standing to sue for losses passed on to them if a duty is owed and loss suffered, particularly under EU competition law and the Competition Act. The pass-on defence is not legally impossible and is reasonably arguable; the issues of law regarding trusts, companies, and partnerships can be decided now, but contract issues must be determined at trial.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 399 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Allianz Global Investors GmbH and Others; First Defendant: Barclays Bank plc; Second Defendant: Citibank, N.A; Third Defendant: Citigroup Inc.; Fourth Defendant: HSBC Bank plc; Fifth Defendant: JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A; Sixth Defendant: JPMorgan Chase & Co.; Seventh Defendant: NatWest Markets Plc; Eighth Defendant: UBS AG; Ninth Defendant: MUFG Bank, LTD.; Tenth Defendant: Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim / Interlocutory Application—strike Out and Amendment of Pleadings
Outcome
Claimants' strike-out application dismissed in respect of trust, company, and partnership issues; contract issue reserved for trial.
Legal Topics
Pass on Defence, Breach of Statutory Duty, Reflective Loss, EU Law Effectiveness, Summary Judgment Principles
Competition Law Trust Law Company Law Partnership Law Contract Law Pass on Defence Breach of Statutory Duty Reflective Loss +2 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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allianz Global Investors GmbH and Others

Claimant

Barclays Bank plc

First Defendant

Citibank, N.A

Second Defendant

Citigroup Inc.

Third Defendant

HSBC Bank plc

Fourth Defendant

JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A

Fifth Defendant

JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Sixth Defendant

NatWest Markets Plc

Seventh Defendant

UBS AG

Eighth Defendant

MUFG Bank, LTD.

Ninth Defendant

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.

Tenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim / Interlocutory Application—strike Out and Amendment of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pass-on mitigation defence can succeed in investment fund context
  2. 2 Whether beneficiaries, shareholders, or partners have standing to sue for losses passed on via redemption/withdrawal
  3. 3 Application of EU competition law and English law principles to pass-on

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that, under English law, beneficiaries, former shareholders, and former partners may have standing to sue for losses passed on to them if a duty is owed and loss suffered, particularly under EU competition law and the Competition Act. The pass-on defence is not legally impossible and is reasonably arguable; the issues of law regarding trusts, companies, and partnerships can be decided now, but contract issues must be determined at trial.

Court Disposition

Claimants' strike-out application dismissed in respect of trust, company, and partnership issues; contract issue reserved for trial.

Orders

  • Defendants permitted to amend their pleadings to incorporate Further Particulars of Pass-On Defences.
  • Strike-out application dismissed except as regards contract issue, which will be determined at trial.