Tweet
The second part of the long awaited judgement in the test case between the OFT and the banks is due to be handed down tomorrow (Wednesday 8th October) at around 4.30pm at the High Court by Justice Andrew Smith.
The judgement will encompass whether insufficient funds charges terms imposed by the banks up to November 2007 may be deemed as penalties and thus the level of charges are subject to assessment of proportionality, and whether the terms may be looked at under fairness principles of the UTCCR 1999.
In April Justice Smith judged banks current terms (those since November 2007) may be assessed under fairness principles, but that no current terms may be deemed as penalties at common law.
We expect Justice Smith to apply UTCCR to historic terms, and we also expect a number of banks historic terms and charges to be deemed as being capable of being penalties. This excludes Nationwide as Justice Smith has already ruled Nationwide Building Society's historic terms as not being capable of being penalties.
At the end of July the OFT wrote to the banks with their initial views on the fairness of the current terms relating to charges and raised concerns of unfairness with the majority of banks.
Two LegalBeaglers will be attending the handing down of the Judgement tomorrow and we hope to bring you the news, titbits, and full judgement as it happens.
The Judgement will also be posted on the courts website for public view as soon as it is handed down.
The Judgement will be subject to appeal, this process is expected to begin October 28th. The current waiver imposed by the FSA is expected to remain in place till January 2009 at least.
24 April 2008
High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Commercial Court judgment
The Office of Fair Trading –v– Abbey National PLC and 7 others (PDF 536kb)
The judgement will encompass whether insufficient funds charges terms imposed by the banks up to November 2007 may be deemed as penalties and thus the level of charges are subject to assessment of proportionality, and whether the terms may be looked at under fairness principles of the UTCCR 1999.
In April Justice Smith judged banks current terms (those since November 2007) may be assessed under fairness principles, but that no current terms may be deemed as penalties at common law.
We expect Justice Smith to apply UTCCR to historic terms, and we also expect a number of banks historic terms and charges to be deemed as being capable of being penalties. This excludes Nationwide as Justice Smith has already ruled Nationwide Building Society's historic terms as not being capable of being penalties.
At the end of July the OFT wrote to the banks with their initial views on the fairness of the current terms relating to charges and raised concerns of unfairness with the majority of banks.
Two LegalBeaglers will be attending the handing down of the Judgement tomorrow and we hope to bring you the news, titbits, and full judgement as it happens.
The Judgement will also be posted on the courts website for public view as soon as it is handed down.
The Judgement will be subject to appeal, this process is expected to begin October 28th. The current waiver imposed by the FSA is expected to remain in place till January 2009 at least.
24 April 2008
High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Commercial Court judgment
The Office of Fair Trading –v– Abbey National PLC and 7 others (PDF 536kb)
