Back to Insights listing

Banking and financial services, Commercial disputes, International / offshoreWednesday 13 May 2026

Court of Appeal rejects jurisdiction challenge in Lebanese banking case

The Court of Appeal has rejected a jurisdiction challenge brought by Bank Audi, the largest bank in Lebanon, in respect of a claim brought by Sheikh Alesayi for the transfer of USD 24m of funds held by him with the Bank in Lebanon.

At a 3-day hearing before Constable J below [2025] EWHC 1033 (KB), the Court considered the jurisdiction to bring a claim under the consumer provisions in ss15B-15E Civil Judgments and Jurisdiction Act 1982 (the “CJJA”). The Bank argued that there was not a good arguable case that Sheikh Alesayi was domiciled in England at the relevant time or that the Bank directed activities to England. The Bank also contended that a contract had not been “concluded” for the purposes of the CJJA in 2016 when Sheikh Alesayi signed a comprehensive new set of terms and conditions, and that a contract was concluded only when he first opened an account in 1994 (the “Contract Conclusion Issue”). Constable J rejected the Bank’s Part 11 application (including on the question as to the direction of activity; in this regard, it is notable that the Judge placed reliance on documents that were disclosed by the Bank only as a result of a disclosure order made on the jurisdiction challenge, the judgment in respect of which sets out the test for disclosure in such circumstances: [2025] EWHC 440 (KB)).

The Bank appealed on the Contract Conclusion Issue. The Court of Appeal (Peter Jackson, Popplewell and Zacaroli LJJ) unanimously rejected the Bank’s appeal, and the Bank’s jurisdiction challenge, finding that the test for whether a new contract is concluded for the purposes of the CJJA is whether the variation agreed between the contracting parties is of such magnitude that it gives rise not to the mere updating or amendment of the contract but to the creation of a new legal relationship between the contracting parties, so that the initial contract should be regarded as having been replaced by a new contract ([2026] EWCA Civ 551).

Bobby Friedman KC and Caspar Bartscherer acted for the successful Claimant/Respondent, instructed by Graham Shear, Andrew Street, Tegan Goddard, Fiona Boyle, and Chloe Allen of BCLP.

People to view:

Share by: Email

Related Insights View all thought leadership

  1. Placeholder

    External Conferences

    Norwich Pharmacal: A Settled Jurisdiction or Room for Manoeuvre?

    Wednesday 24 June | 8.30am - 10.30am
    Gallagher's, London

    Speakers:
    Thomas Grant KC

    View more
  2. Placeholder

    External Conferences

    Save the Date – Wilberforce BVI Conference & Dinner

    Tuesday 15 September 2026
    BVI International Arbitration Centre and Brandywine Estate Restaurant, BVI

    View more
  3. Placeholder

    Events / Webinars

    Save the Date – Wilberforce Cayman Conference & Dinner 2026

    Thursday 17 September 2026
    Kimpton Seafire Resort, Grand Cayman

    View more
  4. Placeholder

    News

    Wilberforce nominated in multiple categories at Legal 500 Bar Awards

    Wilberforce Chambers is delighted to share that we have been nominated in multiple categories at Legal 500 Bar Awards including ‘Chancery Set of the Year’ and  ‘Property and Housing Set of the Year’. Congratulations to the following members of Chambers who... Read more

    Friday 12 June 2026

    View more

View all thought leadership