[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) Decisions >> Graiseley Properties Ltd & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc [2012] EWHC 3093 (Comm) (29 October 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2012/3093.html Cite as: [2012] EWHC 3093 (Comm) |
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
COMMERCIAL COURT
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
Graiseley Properties Limited and others |
Claimant |
|
- and - |
||
Barclays Bank PLC |
Defendant |
____________________
Mr Adrian Beltrami QC and Mr Richard Hanke (instructed by Clifford Chance) for the Defendants
Hearing date: 29th October 2012
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
The Hon Mr Justice Flaux:
"The rate at which an individual contributor panel bank could borrow funds were it to do so by asking for and then accepting interbank offers in reasonable market size just prior to 11.00 am London time."
"Benchmark reference rates to indicate the interest rates that banks charge when lending to each other. They are fundamental to the operation of both UK and international financial markets, including markets in interest rate derivatives contracts."
"(1) On any given date up to and including the date of the Swap and the date of the Collar, LIBOR represented the interest rate as defined by the BBA, being the average rate at which an individual contributor panel bank could borrow funds by asking for and accepting interbank offers in reasonable market size just prior to 11.00 am on that date.
(2) Barclays had no reason to believe that on any given date, LIBOR had represented, or might in the future represent, anything other than the interest rate defined by the BBA, being the average rate at which an individual contributor panel bank could borrow funds by asking for and accepting interbank offers in reasonable market size just prior to 11.00 am on that date.
(3) Barclays had not on any given date, up to and including the date of the Swap and the Collar, (a), made false or misleading LIBOR submissions to the BBA and/or (b), engaged in the practice of attempting to manipulate LIBOR, such that it represented a different rate from that defined by the BBA, viz a rate measured at least in part by reference to choices made by panel banks as to the rate that would best suit them in their dealings with third parties; and
(4) Barclays did not intend in the future to
(a),make false or misleading LIBOR submissions to the BBA and/or
(b), engage in the practice of attempting to manipulate LIBOR, such that it represented a different rate from that defined by the BBA".
"The principal is liable if while not expressly authorising the agent to make the false representation he knew it to be untrue and was guilty of some positive wrongful conduct as by consciously permitting the agent to remain ignorant to the true facts so as to prevent the disclosure of the truth to the third party if the third party should ask the agent for information or in the hope that the agent would make some false representation. The agent's representation when made would of course require to be within the scope of his actual or apparent authority."
"If the reasonable addressee would understand the instrument against the other terms and the relevant background to mean something more ie that something is to happen in that particular event which is not expressly dealt with in the instruments terms then it is said that the court implies a term as to what will happen if the event in question occurs."