header-logo header-logo

02 August 2007
Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Banking
printer mail-detail

Lawyer loses overdraft fees test case

News

A rookie barrister has lost his landmark legal battle to force NatWest bank to justify its fees and to cough up damages for taking £2,500 from his account in unauthorised overdraft charges.

NatWest had already offered Tom Brennan £3,000 but he was seeking aggravated damages at the City of London County Court for stress and exemplary damages for “deliberate, malicious or negligent” behaviour. However, in an 80-minute judgment, Judge Peter Simpson comprehensively rejected Brennan’s legal arguments.

“It is not for the claimant to set himself up as a champion of other customers,” he said. “He does not have any legal standing to litigate on behalf of other people.”

Judge Simpson refused Brennan leave to appeal, but outside the court the currently non-practising barrister said he would approach the High Court directly and ask it to hear his case.

The case comes a week after the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) announced it will push for a High Court declaration on whether the rules in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/2083) apply to overdraft charges.

Brennan claims that even if the OFT manages to clarify this point, its case would not make clear the position for bank customers who ran up overdraft charges in the past.

Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Banking
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll