Examples of Relevant Loans in a sentence
An investigation into what actually happened to advances under the Relevant Loans, and in particular the US$1.9bn advanced to the English and BVI Defendants, was an essential part of considering whether its claim was being advanced on a sound basis, and was something that the Bank had to disclose to the court as being relevant to the strength of its claim for such extensive, urgent relief.
Mr Lewis exhibits at Schedule 6 charts depicting the movement of monies in connection with the Relevant Loans.
Mr Lafferty has sought to show what happened to all the monies drawn down at any time under the Relevant Loans.
The evidence filed on behalf of the Defendants presents a very different picture in relation to the Relevant Loans and the role played by the English and BVI Defendants from the evidence of Mr Lewis.
Thus, of the US$1.91 billion received by the English and BVI Defendants (and immediately transferred by them into the bank accounts at the Bank of six offshore companies), only US$248 million are funds that were drawn down under the Relevant Loans but never repaid to the Bank before being transferred to the English and BVI Defendants.
For the reasons given above, there is a good arguable case that at most about US$515m of Relevant Loans passed through their accounts in such a way as to be capable of causing loss to the Bank in connection with those loans.
In fact, the Bank’s case, when properly analysed, relates to losses arising from particular prepayments made with funds alleged to have been previously drawn down under the Relevant Loans, but Mr Lafferty has gone further and sought (with the benefit of work done by expert analysts) to address all drawdowns under the Relevant Loans.
These proceedings are said to give rise to issues about the lawfulness of the new loans, and whether or not they were validly used to repay Relevant Loans.
None of the other suppliers who received sums from time to time under Relevant Loans has been sued by the Bank.
Given the basis of the Bank’s claim, relying on specific drawdowns under identified Relevant Loans, the information that the Bank had that was not disclosed was highly material and would have damaged the attempt by the Bank to justify suing the First and Second Defendants under Article 6 of the Lugano Convention.