Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 NOVEMBER 2014

Fraudulent Misrepresentation By A Bank And The ISDA Master Agreement

Dentons
Dentons
Contributor
Dentons

Dentons

The Firm Across over 80 countries, Dentons helps you grow, protect, operate and finance your...

View firm profile
Explore more from Dentons

The Judge held that UBS had indeed made such representations, which it knew to be false, and that it was liable for fraudulent misrepresentation as a result.

United KingdomFinance and Banking

Aspects of the recent judgment in litigation between UBS, Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig GmbH, Depfa Bank plc and Landesbank Baden-Württemberg - [2014] EWHC 3615 (Comm)

Few claims result in judgments as long as that recently handed down by Mr Justice Males (the Judge) in the litigation between UBS, Kommunale Wasserwerke Leipzig GmbH (KWL), Depfa Bank plc and Landesbank Baden-Württemberg (LBBW), but the length of the judgment is proportionate to the complexity of the issues decided by the Judge in the four actions between the parties (all of which were tried together).

This update considers only one of those issues, of particular significance for Depfa, for which this firm acted in the litigation. That issue was whether, in inviting Depfa to intermediate in a swap between it and KWL, UBS made certain implied representations to Depfa in relation to its belief in the honesty of those acting for and advising KWL, and the integrity of the transaction proposed.

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