Compound interest meaning

This Checklist This Checklist presents, in a tabular format, the matters to address when preparing a loan that references a compounded risk-free rate (RFR) such as the Sterling Overnight Interbank Average Rate (SONIA), calculated in arrears. It explains the purpose of the key provisions, highlights issues to weigh up, and offers drafting pointers and practical guidance for practitioners. For further analysis, see Practice Note: Interest provisions in risk-free rate based loan agreements. The Checklist draws on provisions contained in the Multicurrency Term and Revolving Facilities Agreement incorporating backward-looking compound rates and forward looking term rates (lookback without observation shift) issued by the LMA (the LMA Compounded RFR Facilities Agreement). The LMA’s recommended form documentation, with accompanying user guides and commentary, is accessible to LMA members on its website. While the Checklist is prepared on the basis of LMA-style documentation, the guidance will also be relevant to bilateral transactions and agreements using other loan forms. Practice Note: Interest provisions in risk-free rate based loan agreements provides a fuller discussion and...

In this issue Key DR developments Claims and remedies Cross-border disputes Injunctions Litigation Case management Civil appeals Scottish Dispute Resolution New content Dates for your diary Useful information LexTalk®Dispute Resolution: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Key DR developments Speeches Master of the Rolls delivers a speech that highlights the International Jurisdiction Taskforce to align digital asset laws The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has released the speech by Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls, delivered on 6 November 2025 at the 45th Anniversary of the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London. In that address, he set out the creation and remit of the International Jurisdiction Taskforce—an international body formed in July 2025 to foster alignment of private law systems for digital assets, digital finance and digital trade across multiple jurisdictions, including the UK, the United States of America, France, Singapore, Australia, Japan...

Re Grosvenor Property Developers Ltd (in liquidation) Atkinson and another v Varma (also known as Sanjeev Varma) and others [2020] EWHC 1114 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? There are four practical consequences flowing from this ruling: It firmly affirms that a defendant who has been debarred may not at all advance submissions in their own defence, save to point out obvious, manifest errors. It also delineates how far, in practice, the claimant must go to properly establish the claim against such a party. It offers an instance of a highly persuasive forensic case, without any expert opinion or cross-examination, that both documents and individuals were inventions. It considers the line between de facto directors and shadow directors. It exemplifies an award of compound interest in a dispute concerning the misapplication of corporate funds. What was the background? The company raised approximately £7.5m from investors to transform a derelict hotel into student housing. By the...

High Court judge William Trower has held that Igor Kolomoisky and Gennadiy Bogolyubov are jointly and severally liable to pay JSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank over US$1.76bn in damages together with US$1.19bn in compound interest, after he found in July that the two were responsible for the fraud. The figure corresponds to the US$1.9bn siphoned from Ukraine’s biggest bank, less the value of assets already restored to PrivatBank. Judge Trower explained that, under Ukrainian law, the interest is warranted to properly compensate PrivatBank for being deprived of the use of the misappropriated funds over time. Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov must also pay a further £76.4m as an interim costs payment. He determined that costs should be awarded on the indemnity basis because the pair persisted throughout the proceedings in asserting they were not to blame for the fraud. He concluded that this entailed them putting forward a case designed to mislead the court about the true position in numerous respects, consistent with his conclusions about what occurred and how the case was...

This Practice Note examines matters concerning interest in the context of foreign currency claims. It addresses seeking interest on claims stated in a foreign currency, issues where the substantive law is a foreign law, and interest on judgment debts expressed in a foreign currency. For guidance on foreign currency claims, see Practice Note: Foreign currency claims. For guidance on foreign currency aspects of costs orders and interest on costs, see Practice Note: Cross-border disputes—costs considerations. For general guidance on: interest, see Practice Notes: Claiming interest and Claiming interest—compound interest judgment debt, see Practice Note: Interest on judgment debts Pleading interest Where a claim is advanced in a foreign currency, interest can be sought by reference to the applicable foreign rate. For the court to apply that foreign rate, it must: be pleaded in the particulars of claim (see Practice Note: Claiming interest—Pleading interest in the claim form and particulars of claim), and be proved by evidence, unless admitted...

This tracker outlines and condenses concluded competition General Court cases that are not appeals. For live General Court appeal matters, see General Court appeals—ongoing cases tracker. 2026 Case Issues Developments Case T- 313/21 SAS Cargo Group and Others v Commission Proceedings alleging the Commission’s omission to pay the Default Interest Amount Payable and the Compound Interest Amount Payable as ordered by the General Court in multiple judgments, including Case T- 39/11. See Application Judgment given—25/03/2026; damages claim partly upheld. The General Court grants damages for the Commission’s non-payment of interest following the 2015 annulment of the Airfreight cartel decision Hearing held—05/06/2025 Lodged—03/06/2021 Case T- 310/21 Air Canada v Commission Proceedings contesting the Commission’s failure to settle the Default Interest Amount Payable and the Compound Interest Amount Payable as mandated by the General Court in a series of judgments, including Case T- 39/11. See Application Judgment given—25/03/2026; damages claim partly upheld. The General Court grants...

ARCHIVED This archived case hub reflects the position as at the judgment dated 18 August 2021; it is no longer maintained. See the timeline, commentary and related cases... Case facts Outline CAT judgment on the remitted collective proceedings order sought by Mr Walter Merricks, who applied to act as the class representative to bring opt-out collective proceedings under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998... Latest development On 18 August 2021, the CAT handed down its judgment, deciding that Mr Merricks should be authorised as the class representative under section 47B(8) of the Competition Act 1998, provided his litigation funder gives a suitable undertaking regarding liability for adverse costs... Parties Appellants: Mastercard Incorporated, Mastercard International Incorporated and Mastercard Europe S.P.R.L (together, Mastercard). Mastercard is the international payment organisation responsible for managing and co-ordinating the Mastercard and Maestro card payment systems, which includes, among other things, setting system rules and supplying participating financial institutions with authorisation and compensation...

1 Interest on late payment If a party does not make payment in accordance with this Agreement, the other party may claim, in addition to any sum that ought properly to have been settled, and recover, [ simple OR compound ] interest on that sum (accruing on a daily basis from the final date for payment until the date payment is in fact made, whether before or after judgment). Such interest will be computed at a rate of [ insert figure ]% per annum above the [ insert name of financial institution eg Bank of England ] base rate then prevailing at the time the amount immediately became overdue under this Agreement. [ The parties agree that the provisions of this clause constitute a substantial remedy for the purposes of section 9(1) of the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998. ]...

It is not clear whether the donor holds a lasting power of attorney (LPA) for property and affairs (P&A), for health and welfare (H&W), or both. As attorneys have determined that the donor’s home should be sold (necessitating a P&A LPA) and that the donor should move into a care home (necessitating a H&W LPA), we proceed on the basis that both LPAs exist and have been registered. We also proceed on the basis that there is more than one attorney. Where authority to act is several rather than joint, the lending attorney may opt out of any decision in which they have a conflict of interests. It is further assumed that: the donor had adequate capacity to enter into the loan the LPAs do not include specific instructions or preferences about when the donor’s home is to be sold and/or when they are to enter a care home (if present, the attorneys should take them into account) the attorney who advanced the loan wishes...