Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 FEBRUARY 2016

Sheehan v Breccia – Key Decision On Surcharge Interest In Loan Agreements

Maples Group
Maples Group
Contributor
Maples Group

Maples Group

The Maples Group, through its leading international law firm, Maples and Calder, advises global...

View firm profile
Explore more from Maples Group

On 5 February 2016 the Commercial Division of the High Court (Haughton J) handed down judgment in two linked cases: Sheehan v Breccia and others, and Flynn and Benray Limited v Breccia.

IrelandLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

On 5 February 2016 the Commercial Division of the High Court (Haughton J) handed down judgment in two linked cases: Sheehan v Breccia and others, and Flynn and Benray Limited v Breccia. The facts of the cases are complex but the judgments raise important issues for banks, asset managers and loan purchasers. This note summarises the key issues. A more detailed note of the decisions will follow.

Key Points

The key takeaways from the judgments are as follows:

  • A clause providing for surcharge interest that effectively doubled the interest payments is a penalty and is therefore unlawful.
  • In order for surcharge interest to be lawful, it should be a genuine pre-estimate of loss arising from a breach and not merely a generic rate.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from