Capital Bank Plc v Soor [2005] EWCA Civ 1710 (16 December 2005)
The appeal was refused because the defendant failed to provide adequate evidence or details to support his claim that payments had not been credited, and the claimant had properly investigated and accounted for all payments where information was provided. There was no substantive ground to vary the consent order or to criticize the claimant's conduct regarding evidence.
- Citation
- [2005] EWCA Civ 1710
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Capital Bank PLC; Defendant/applicant: Harminder Soor
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 16 December 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
- Outcome
- permission to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Guarantees, Consent Orders, Variation of Orders, Credit of Payments
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Capital Bank PLC
Claimant/respondent
Harminder Soor
Defendant/applicant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the consent order should be varied based on alleged uncredited payments
- 2 Whether the claimant properly investigated and credited payments
- 3 Whether the defendant had proper opportunity to answer claimant's evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was refused because the defendant failed to provide adequate evidence or details to support his claim that payments had not been credited, and the claimant had properly investigated and accounted for all payments where information was provided. There was no substantive ground to vary the consent order or to criticize the claimant's conduct regarding evidence.
Court Disposition
permission to appeal refused
Orders
- application for permission to appeal refused
- costs awarded to respondent
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment