- Cited — Granville Technology Group Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v LG Display Co Limited & Anor 2023-08-16
“…terest on their damages pursuant to the court’s equitable jurisdiction, as described by Lord Brandon in President of India v La Pintada Compania Navigacion SA [1985] AC 104. This includes power to award compound interest “in cases where money had been obtained and retained by fraud”. The claimants say that the defendants’ conduct …”
- Followed — Granville Technology Group Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v LG Display Co Limited & Anor 2023-08-16
“…In La Pintada [1985] AC 104, 116A-B, Lord Brandon described the court’s equitable jurisdiction to award compound interest in the following terms:…”
- Explained — Granville Technology Group Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v LG Display Co Limited & Anor 2023-08-16
“… least a major factor, in several later decisions at the highest level (London, Chatham & Dover Railway Co v South Eastern Railway Co [1893] AC 429, La Pintada 1985] AC 104, Westdeutsche [1996] AC 669). As I have explained, La Pintada recognised one inroad into this principle, namely that interest could be recovered as damages for…”
- Cited — Granville Technology Group Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v LG Display Co Limited & Anor 2023-08-16
“…In La Pintada [1985] AC 104 the House made clear that, contrary to the general understanding of the effect of the London, Chatham and Dover Railway case [1893] AC 429, claims for damages …”
- Cited — Bridgehouse (Bradford No. 2) Ltd v BAE Systems Plc 2020-06-16
“…nly by clear words. He cited in this connection Chandris v Isbrandtsen-Moller Co Inc [1951] 1 KB 240 and President of India v La Pintada Compania Navigacion SA [1985] AC 104. In Chandris, an arbitrator was held to have power to award interest notwithstanding the fact that section 3 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1…”