In Gary Ronald Marshall v Barclays Bank plc [2015] EWHC 2000 (QB), the bank applied to strike out a claim against it for alleged mis-selling of an interest rate hedging product (or to obtain summary judgment), the basis that the claim was barred by a general release in a pre-existing settlement agreement between the bank and the claimant.
The court was satisfied that the claimant knew that he had a right to make a claim against the bank in relation to mis-selling of the hedge product to him before he entered into the settlement agreement. Any argument that the bank could or should have informed the claimant about the potential of the review of mis-selling swap products before entering into the settlement agreement was therefore, in the Judge's view, "hopeless". It could not be argued that the consequence of non-disclosure by the bank of the review could be such as to discharge the settlement agreement. Permission to amend the particulars of claim was separately considered and refused.
To read more about the case from our banking litigation team, click here.
Disclaimer
The articles published on this website, current at the dates of publication set out above, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action.