Persons Identified in Schedule 1 v Standard Chartered PLC

Persons Identified in Schedule 1 v Standard Chartered PLC

The court refused to strike out or grant summary judgment on the Common Reliance Claims and Delay Claims, holding that the law on reliance under para. 3 and the requirements for Delay Claims under para. 5 are developing, fact-sensitive, and unsuitable for summary determination. Judicial comity does not require following Barclays in case management decisions where factual and legal uncertainties remain. Both claims will proceed to trial for determination on full evidence.

Parties
Claimants: Persons Identified in Schedule 1; Defendant: Standard Chartered PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application (strike Out / Summary Judgment)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Reliance in Securities Claims, Dishonest Delay, Strike Out and Summary Judgment, Judicial Comity
Financial Services Law Securities Litigation Company Law Statutory Interpretation Reliance in Securities Claims Dishonest Delay Strike Out and Summary Judgment Judicial Comity

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 4 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Persons Identified in Schedule 1

Claimants

Standard Chartered PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application (strike Out / Summary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Common Reliance Claims under para. 3 of Schedule 10A FSMA should be struck out or summarily dismissed for lack of legal merit
  2. 2 Whether Delay Claims under para. 5 of Schedule 10A FSMA require subsequent corrective publication to establish liability
  3. 3 Whether judicial comity requires following Barclays decision

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to strike out or grant summary judgment on the Common Reliance Claims and Delay Claims, holding that the law on reliance under para. 3 and the requirements for Delay Claims under para. 5 are developing, fact-sensitive, and unsuitable for summary determination. Judicial comity does not require following Barclays in case management decisions where factual and legal uncertainties remain. Both claims will proceed to trial for determination on full evidence.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Both Common Reliance Claims and Delay Claims will proceed to trial.
  • Parties to review and amend pleadings as necessary.