BNP PARIBAS SA v JACOB AGAM & Anor [2017] SGHC(I) 10 (17 November 2017)

BNP PARIBAS SA v JACOB AGAM & Anor [2017] SGHC(I) 10 (17 November 2017)

The court held that the personal guarantees executed by Jacob and Ruth Agam were valid, binding, and enforceable as contracts of indemnity under Singapore law. The French law defences were abandoned by the defendants, and no evidence was led to support them. The non est factum defence by Ruth Agam failed as the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] SGHC(I) 10
Parties
Plaintiff: BNP Paribas SA; Defendant: Jacob Agam; Defendant: Ruth Agam
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
17 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Suit / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff. Defendants held jointly and severally liable under the personal guarantees. Counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Personal Guarantees, Indemnity Liability, Choice of Law, Jurisdiction Clauses, Set Off Provisions, Non Est Factum, Margin Requirements, Default and Enforcement
Credit and Security Guarantees and Indemnities Banking Law Personal Guarantees Indemnity Liability Choice of Law Jurisdiction Clauses Set Off Provisions +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BNP Paribas SA

Plaintiff

Jacob Agam

Defendant

Ruth Agam

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Suit / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are liable under personal guarantees for loans advanced to their companies by the plaintiff bank
  2. 2 Whether the guarantees are enforceable in light of alleged French law issues and defences
  3. 3 Whether the defence of non est factum is available to Ruth Agam

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the personal guarantees executed by Jacob and Ruth Agam were valid, binding, and enforceable as contracts of indemnity under Singapore law. The French law defences were abandoned by the defendants, and no evidence was led to support them. The non est factum defence by Ruth Agam failed as the evidence showed she understood the nature of the documents she signed and took no reasonable care to avoid her obligations. The set-off and counterclaim defences failed due to the no set-off clauses in the facility agreements and lack of evidence. The plaintiff was entitled to judgment for the outstanding amounts under the guarantees.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff. Defendants held jointly and severally liable under the personal guarantees. Counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay the outstanding sums due under the SCI Ruth Agam and Det Internationale loans, totaling €12,948,707.79 and €17,060,811.85 respectively, together with continuing interest and indemnity costs.
  • Counterclaim by Jacob Agam dismissed.