Banque Worms v BankAmerica International: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Removed redirect to Discharge-for-value defense
Tag: Removed redirect
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|casenote|}} Banque Worms involved a revolving credit facility between Spedley and the Banque. In 1989 the Banque informed Spedley that it would not be renewing the revolver and demanded payment of the outstanding balance on April 10, 1989.
{{a|casenote|}}Banque Worms involved a [[revolving credit facility]] between Spedley and the Banque. In 1989 the Banque Worms informed Spedley that it would not be renewing the [[revolver]] and demanded payment of the outstanding balance on April 10, 1989.


On 10 April 1989, at 12:36 am, Spedley instructed its bank, SPI, to wire the total amount due to the Banque at its BankAmerica International account. By 3:37 am the same day – not three hours later – Spedley had a change of heart and instructed SPI to stop payment to Banque Worms and instead make a payment in the same amount to National Westminster Bank USA.”
On 10 April 1989, at 12:36 am, Spedley instructed its bank, SPI, to wire the total amount due to the Banque at its BankAmerica International account. By 3:37 am the same day – not three hours later – Spedley had a change of heart and instructed SPI to stop payment to Banque Worms and instead make a payment in the same amount to National Westminster Bank USA.”


Notwithstanding the second instruction Spedley wired the full amount to BankAmerica.
You won’t believe this, but notwithstanding the second instruction SPI went ahead and wired the full amount to BankAmerica. Can you imagine it?


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[discharge-for-value defense]]
*[[discharge-for-value defense]]
*[[Revolving credit facility]]

Revision as of 17:52, 18 February 2021

The Jolly Contrarian Law Reports
Our own, snippy, in-house court reporting service.
Editorial Board of the JCLR: Managing Editor: Lord Justice Cocklecarrot M.R. · General Editor: Sir Jerrold Baxter-Morley, K.C. · Principle witness: Mrs. Pinterman

Common law | Litigation | Contract | Tort |

Click ᐅ to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

Banque Worms involved a revolving credit facility between Spedley and the Banque. In 1989 the Banque Worms informed Spedley that it would not be renewing the revolver and demanded payment of the outstanding balance on April 10, 1989.

On 10 April 1989, at 12:36 am, Spedley instructed its bank, SPI, to wire the total amount due to the Banque at its BankAmerica International account. By 3:37 am the same day – not three hours later – Spedley had a change of heart and instructed SPI to stop payment to Banque Worms and instead make a payment in the same amount to National Westminster Bank USA.”

You won’t believe this, but notwithstanding the second instruction SPI went ahead and wired the full amount to BankAmerica. Can you imagine it?

See also