Leeds City Council & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Anor [2021] EWHC 363 (Comm) (22 February 2021)

Leeds City Council & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Anor [2021] EWHC 363 (Comm) (22 February 2021)

The court held that, for a misrepresentation claim to proceed, the claimant must plead and prove awareness or understanding of the representation at the time it was made; mere assumption or subconscious influence is insufficient. The claimants' pleadings did not allege contemporaneous conscious awareness of the alleged representations, and thus failed to disclose a complete cause of action in misrepresentation. Accordingly, the claims were struck out on the Reliance Issue.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 363 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Leeds City Council; Claimant: Greater Manchester Combined Authority; Claimant: Newcastle City Council; Claimant: North East Lincolnshire Council; Claimant: Nottingham City Council; Claimant: Oldham Council; Claimant: Sheffield Council; Claimant: London Borough of Newham; Defendant: Barclays Bank PLC; Defendant: Barclays Bank UK PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Financial List Proceedings (applications to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment) / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment Before Trial)
Outcome
Claims struck out on the Reliance Issue; summary judgment granted for the defendants.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, LIBOR Manipulation, Rescission, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Reliance in Misrepresentation, Affirmation of Contract
Commercial Law Banking and Finance Contract Law Tort Law Misrepresentation Fraudulent Misrepresentation LIBOR Manipulation Rescission +4 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 3 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leeds City Council

Claimant

Greater Manchester Combined Authority

Claimant

Newcastle City Council

Claimant

North East Lincolnshire Council

Claimant

Nottingham City Council

Claimant

Oldham Council

Claimant

Sheffield Council

Claimant

London Borough of Newham

Claimant

Barclays Bank PLC

Defendant

Barclays Bank UK PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Financial List Proceedings (applications to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment) / Interlocutory (application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment Before Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' pleadings disclose a legally sufficient case on reliance for misrepresentation claims (the 'Reliance Issue')
  2. 2 Whether the claimants have affirmed the contracts and are thereby barred from rescission (the 'Affirmation Issue')

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, for a misrepresentation claim to proceed, the claimant must plead and prove awareness or understanding of the representation at the time it was made; mere assumption or subconscious influence is insufficient. The claimants' pleadings did not allege contemporaneous conscious awareness of the alleged representations, and thus failed to disclose a complete cause of action in misrepresentation. Accordingly, the claims were struck out on the Reliance Issue.

Court Disposition

Claims struck out on the Reliance Issue; summary judgment granted for the defendants.

Orders

  • The claims of all claimants are struck out for failure to plead a legally sufficient case on reliance.
  • Summary judgment is entered for Barclays Bank PLC and Barclays Bank UK PLC.