Macmillan Inc v Bishopsgate Investment Trust plc (No 3)

MacMillan Inc v Bishopsgate Investment Trust plc (No 3)
Robert Maxwell
Court	Court of Appeal
Full case name	MacMillan Inc v Bishopsgate Investment Trust plc and Others (No 3)
Decided	2 November 1995
Citations	[1995] EWCA Civ 55 [1996] 1 WLR 387 [1996] 1 All ER 585
Case history
Appealed from	[1995] 1 WLR 978 [1995] 3 All ER 747
Subsequent action	Macmillan Inc v Bishopsgate Investment Trust plc (No 4) [1998] EWCA Civ 1680
Related actions	Macmillan Inc v Bishopsgate Investment Trust plc (No 1) [1993] 1 WLR 1372 Macmillan Inc v Bishopsgate Investment Trust Plc (No 2) [1995] 5 WLUK 313
Court membership
Judges sitting	Staughton LJ, Auld LJ and Aldous LJ
Keywords
conflict of laws lex situs company shares mortgage fraud characterisation renvoi priority

Macmillan Inc v Bishopsgate Investment Trust plc (No 3) [1995] EWCA Civ 55, [1996] WLR 387 is a judicial decision relating to English trusts law and conflict of laws case from the Court of Appeal.^{[1][2][3][4][5]} The issue arose in relation to frauds conducted by the late Robert Maxwell.

The appeal was not actually an appeal on the full decision, but an appeal to determine a preliminary issue: specifically whether the proper law to determine the issue was English law or New York law. Macmillan argued that the main issue was a claim in restitution, and so the proper law to determine the issue was English law. The respondent banks argued that the main issue was who had title to the shares, and so the proper law to determine that issue was New York law. The reported decision is one of a series of cases in relation to the fraud, and probably the most widely reported and cited decision within that series.

The trial at first instance on the full facts ([1995] 1 WLR 978, before Millett J) had taken "the best part of a year, from October 1992 to July 1993".^[6] The respondent banks won at first instance and upon appeal.