Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures Ltd & Anor

Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures Ltd & Anor

The BORN Summary contained false representations on collateral and security, ACE relied on these in entering the SPA, and validly rescinded the SPA. ACE did not affirm the SPA nor was barred by laches or inability to restitute. RBI's claim for specific performance and damages fails. Ashurst did not breach warranty as there was no realistic prospect of an alternative arrangement at the time of payment out; loss of chance claim fails.

Parties
Claimant: Raiffeisen Bank International AG; First Defendant: Asia Coal Energy Ventures Limited; Second Defendant: Ashurst LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Final Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Rescission, Specific Performance, Affirmation, Loss of Chance, Indemnity, Breach of Warranty
Contract Law Misrepresentation Commercial Law Rescission Specific Performance Affirmation Loss of Chance Indemnity +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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raiffeisen Bank International AG

Claimant

Asia Coal Energy Ventures Limited

First Defendant

Ashurst LLP

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether representations in the BORN Summary were made and were false
  2. 2 Whether ACE relied on and was induced by the representations to enter the SPA
  3. 3 Whether ACE validly rescinded the SPA

Ratio Decidendi

The BORN Summary contained false representations on collateral and security, ACE relied on these in entering the SPA, and validly rescinded the SPA. ACE did not affirm the SPA nor was barred by laches or inability to restitute. RBI's claim for specific performance and damages fails. Ashurst did not breach warranty as there was no realistic prospect of an alternative arrangement at the time of payment out; loss of chance claim fails.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed

Orders

  • RBI's claim for specific performance and damages against ACE dismissed
  • RBI's claim against Ashurst for breach of warranty and loss of chance dismissed