Deane & Ors v Coutts & Co & Anor

Deane & Ors v Coutts & Co & Anor

The claimants' case on joint enterprise, agency, and notice is bound to fail as a matter of law. There is no legal basis for secondary liability on the facts pleaded, no evidence to support the asserted normal banking practice, and no real prospect of success at trial. The knowing assistance amendment is inadequately pleaded and does not arise out of the same facts. The claim against RBS fails as liabilities do not pass by assignment and any equities were extinguished on repayment of the loans. The claim is also time-barred and does not fall within the exceptions under the Limitation Act 1980.

Parties
Claimant: Brian Deane; Claimant: Danny Murphy; Claimant: Robert Savage; Claimant: Jason Wilcox; Defendant: Coutts & Co; Defendant: The Royal Bank of Scotland plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil (banking/equity) / Ruling on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Secondary Liability, Agency, Joint Enterprise, Notice (actual and Constructive), Knowing Assistance, Limitation of Actions, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Undue Influence, Equitable Compensation
Banking Law Equity Agency Law Tort Law Secondary Liability Agency Joint Enterprise Notice (actual and Constructive) +5 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Deane

Claimant

Danny Murphy

Claimant

Robert Savage

Claimant

Jason Wilcox

Claimant

Coutts & Co

Defendant

The Royal Bank of Scotland plc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (banking/equity) / Ruling on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are secondarily liable for the wrongdoing of the claimants' financial advisers under joint enterprise, agency, or notice principles
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of claim disclose a reasonable cause of action against the defendants
  3. 3 Whether the claimants have a real prospect of success at trial

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' case on joint enterprise, agency, and notice is bound to fail as a matter of law. There is no legal basis for secondary liability on the facts pleaded, no evidence to support the asserted normal banking practice, and no real prospect of success at trial. The knowing assistance amendment is inadequately pleaded and does not arise out of the same facts. The claim against RBS fails as liabilities do not pass by assignment and any equities were extinguished on repayment of the loans. The claim is also time-barred and does not fall within the exceptions under the Limitation Act 1980.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim is dismissed in its entirety. Ancillary issues to be dealt with at the handing down of judgment or at a later date.