Butterfield Bank v Phillip

Butterfield Bank v Phillip

There was no real prospect of Mr Phillip succeeding in his defence as the alleged errors in the bank's certificate were immaterial, the sale of the property was consistent with professional advice and not at an undervalue, and even if there were merit, the no set-off clause precluded the defence.

Parties
Claimant: Butterfield Bank; Defendant: Phillip
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Judgment After Contested Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant for the entire sum claimed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Manifest Error, Receivership, Sale at Undervalue, Bank Certificates, Default Interest, No Set Off Clause
Banking Law Commercial Law Summary Judgment Manifest Error Receivership Sale at Undervalue Bank Certificates Default Interest +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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Butterfield Bank

Claimant

Phillip

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Judgment After Contested Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the bank's security was sold by receivers at an undervalue
  2. 2 Whether there was a manifest error in the bank's certificate

Ratio Decidendi

There was no real prospect of Mr Phillip succeeding in his defence as the alleged errors in the bank's certificate were immaterial, the sale of the property was consistent with professional advice and not at an undervalue, and even if there were merit, the no set-off clause precluded the defence.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant for the entire sum claimed.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the bank for the full amount.