Ultrabulk A/S v Jagatramka [2017] EWHC 2792 (Comm) (09 November 2017)

Ultrabulk A/S v Jagatramka [2017] EWHC 2792 (Comm) (09 November 2017)

The personal guarantee executed by the defendant is an on-demand bond creating a primary liability to pay US$4,259,395 plus interest upon written demand by the claimant. The guarantee is governed by English law and enforceable in England. Indian law does not render the guarantee void or unenforceable for lack of RBI approval. The defendant's arguments regarding comfort letter, lack of legal advice, and reduction of liability by payments from Gujarat are rejected.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2792 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Ultrabulk A/S; Defendant: Arun Kumar Jagatramka
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (personal Guarantee Enforcement) / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant
Legal Topics
Personal Guarantee, Enforcement of Guarantees, On Demand Bonds, Conflict of Laws, Foreign Exchange Regulations
Commercial Law Contract Law Personal Guarantee Enforcement of Guarantees On Demand Bonds Conflict of Laws Foreign Exchange Regulations

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

Parties

Ultrabulk A/S

Claimant

Arun Kumar Jagatramka

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (personal Guarantee Enforcement) / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the personal guarantee executed by the defendant is enforceable under English law
  2. 2 Whether the guarantee is void or unenforceable under Indian law (FEMA)
  3. 3 Whether the guarantee is a comfort letter or an enforceable agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The personal guarantee executed by the defendant is an on-demand bond creating a primary liability to pay US$4,259,395 plus interest upon written demand by the claimant. The guarantee is governed by English law and enforceable in England. Indian law does not render the guarantee void or unenforceable for lack of RBI approval. The defendant's arguments regarding comfort letter, lack of legal advice, and reduction of liability by payments from Gujarat are rejected.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Defendant to pay US$4,259,395 plus interest at LIBOR plus 2% to the claimant
  • Final anti-suit injunction granted against the defendant