Terna Energy Trading doo v Revolut Ltd (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 1524 (Comm) (18 June 2024)

Terna Energy Trading doo v Revolut Ltd (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 1524 (Comm) (18 June 2024)

The judge's direction for written submissions on consequential matters constituted an adjournment of the hand-down hearing, conferring jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal. Both grounds of appeal have a real prospect of success due to divided judicial authority and the importance of the issues. No sufficient reason was shown to extend time for filing the appellant's notice. Listing of a CCMC should be conditional on whether an appellant's notice is filed.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 1524 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: TERNA ENERGY TRADING doo; Defendant/applicant: REVOLUT LTD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (reverse Summary Judgment/strike Out) / Consequential Matters Following Judgment on Application
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted on both grounds; costs order made; extension of time for appellant's notice refused; CCMC to be listed conditionally.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Unjust Enrichment, Permission to Appeal, Costs, Case Management
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Summary Judgment Strike Out Unjust Enrichment Permission to Appeal Costs Case Management

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

Parties

TERNA ENERGY TRADING doo

Claimant/respondent

REVOLUT LTD

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (reverse Summary Judgment/strike Out) / Consequential Matters Following Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal after remote hand-down and written submissions
  2. 2 Whether permission to appeal should be granted on grounds relating to unjust enrichment and 'at the expense of'
  3. 3 Whether extension of time for appellant's notice should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's direction for written submissions on consequential matters constituted an adjournment of the hand-down hearing, conferring jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal. Both grounds of appeal have a real prospect of success due to divided judicial authority and the importance of the issues. No sufficient reason was shown to extend time for filing the appellant's notice. Listing of a CCMC should be conditional on whether an appellant's notice is filed.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted on both grounds; costs order made; extension of time for appellant's notice refused; CCMC to be listed conditionally.

Orders

  • Applicant to pay respondent's costs of the application in the sum of £50,000 within 14 days.
  • Permission to appeal granted on both grounds.