Byers & Ors v Samba Financial Group [2020] EWHC 853 (Ch) (08 April 2020)

Byers & Ors v Samba Financial Group [2020] EWHC 853 (Ch) (08 April 2020)

The Bank's application to revoke the SAMA disclosure order is refused because there is no material change in circumstances, the risk of prosecution is overstated, and the need for disclosure outweighs the asserted risk. The Court will not issue a letter of request to the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs as it is not appropriate in principle or supported by precedent. The Bank remains subject to its disclosure obligations and faces the risk of its Defence being struck out if it does not comply.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 853 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mark Byers; Claimant: Hugh Dickson; Claimant: Saad Investments Company Limited (in liquidation); Defendant: Samba Financial Group
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Chancery Claim / Interlocutory Applications Before Trial
Outcome
Bank's applications refused; SAMA disclosure order stands; no letter of request issued; Defence not struck out at this stage but remains at risk.
Legal Topics
Disclosure Obligations, Knowing Receipt, Constructive Trust, Foreign Law Application, Sanctions for Non Compliance, Letters of Request, Jurisdictional Issues
Insolvency Banking Law Conflict of Laws Equity and Trusts Disclosure Obligations Knowing Receipt Constructive Trust Foreign Law Application +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Byers

Claimant

Hugh Dickson

Claimant

Saad Investments Company Limited (in liquidation)

Claimant

Samba Financial Group

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Chancery Claim / Interlocutory Applications Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bank should be relieved of its disclosure obligations due to Saudi regulatory restrictions
  2. 2 Whether the SAMA disclosure order should be revoked
  3. 3 Whether the Defence should be struck out for non-compliance

Ratio Decidendi

The Bank's application to revoke the SAMA disclosure order is refused because there is no material change in circumstances, the risk of prosecution is overstated, and the need for disclosure outweighs the asserted risk. The Court will not issue a letter of request to the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs as it is not appropriate in principle or supported by precedent. The Bank remains subject to its disclosure obligations and faces the risk of its Defence being struck out if it does not comply.

Court Disposition

Bank's applications refused; SAMA disclosure order stands; no letter of request issued; Defence not struck out at this stage but remains at risk.

Orders

  • Bank's application to revoke SAMA disclosure order refused
  • Bank's application for a letter of request to the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs refused