As reported on this blog, the UK Supreme Court held in 2013 (here) that the 2009 Order imposing financial restrictions on Bank Mellat in the UK was unlawful. Bank Mellat then brought an action for damages against HM Treasury for resulting losses. The English High Court has just decided 3 preliminary issues, all in favour of the Bank, in a judgment handed down on 6 May 2015 (link here), namely:

1) HM Treasury was wrong to say that the Supreme Court had not decided that the 2009 Order was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights as well as the common law;

2) HM Treasury could not rely on the “reflective loss” principle, i.e. that Bank Mellat’s losses should be disregarded as losses suffered by a shareholder where the company had not brought a claim; and

3) HM Treasury could not limit damages to “possessions” within the meaning of the ECHR.

The damages action continues…

This entry was posted in English court cases, Iran by Maya Lester QC. Bookmark the permalink.

About Maya Lester QC

Maya Lester QC has a wide ranging practice in public law, European law, competition law, international law, human rights & civil liberties. She has a particular expertise in sanctions. As the most recent (2016) Chambers & Partners directory put it, she "owns the world of sanctions". She spent 2011-12 in New York at Columbia Law School lecturing and writing on sanctions. She represents and advises hundreds of companies and individuals before the European and English courts and has acted in most of the leading cases, including Kadi, Tay Za, Central Bank of Iran, NITC and IRISL.

Please Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s