Carey Group Plc & Ors v AIB Group (UK) Plc & Anor [2011] EWHC 567 (Ch) (11 March 2011)

Carey Group Plc & Ors v AIB Group (UK) Plc & Anor [2011] EWHC 567 (Ch) (11 March 2011)

The Facility Agreement expressly permitted assignment to entities such as NAMA, and no implied term restricted such assignment to entities able to provide banking services. AIB UK could terminate the overdraft facility before any transfer, avoiding any breach. The English court has no jurisdiction to restrain voluntary compliance with foreign public law by a party within the jurisdiction, absent a breach of private rights. No basis for declaratory relief was disclosed as there was no real dispute as to legal rights between the claimants and defendants.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 567 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Carey Group Plc; Claimant: PJ Carey (Contractors) Limited; Claimant: PJ Carey Plant Hire (Oval) Limited; Claimant: Seneca Environmental Solutions Limited; Defendant: AIB Group (UK) Plc; Defendant: National Asset Management Agency
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application (interlocutory) / High Court (chancery Division) Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Assignment of Contractual Rights, Implied Terms in Contracts, Enforcement of Foreign Public Law, Declaratory Relief, Banking Facilities and Overdraft Agreements
Contract Law Conflict of Laws Banking Law Public Law Assignment of Contractual Rights Implied Terms in Contracts Enforcement of Foreign Public Law Declaratory Relief +1 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carey Group Plc

Claimant

PJ Carey (Contractors) Limited

Claimant

PJ Carey Plant Hire (Oval) Limited

Claimant

Seneca Environmental Solutions Limited

Claimant

AIB Group (UK) Plc

Defendant

National Asset Management Agency

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Strike Out Application (interlocutory) / High Court (chancery Division) Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed acquisition by NAMA of AIB UK's rights under the Facility Agreement would constitute a breach of contract
  2. 2 Whether the English court should restrain enforcement of the Irish National Asset Management Agency Act 2009 within its jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether declaratory relief should be granted regarding the effect of the Act and the acquisition process

Ratio Decidendi

The Facility Agreement expressly permitted assignment to entities such as NAMA, and no implied term restricted such assignment to entities able to provide banking services. AIB UK could terminate the overdraft facility before any transfer, avoiding any breach. The English court has no jurisdiction to restrain voluntary compliance with foreign public law by a party within the jurisdiction, absent a breach of private rights. No basis for declaratory relief was disclosed as there was no real dispute as to legal rights between the claimants and defendants.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out

Orders

  • The Particulars of Claim are struck out in their entirety, both in their present form and as sought to be amended.
  • No injunction or declaratory relief granted to the claimants.