Motor Insurer

District Court rejected today, with the ruling, two requirements Motor Insurer's Bureau in London against Landsbanki Íslands hf. amounting to nearly 700 million. Motor Insurer's Bureau demanded to be recognized that the requirements would be valued at liquidation of Landsbanki. as priority claims. Landsbanki insisted against claims were rejected.
The District Court sustained the claim of Landsbanki and said not claim priority because the Motor Insurer's Bureau had not given specifically in lodging the claim of priority would be the case, although the said requirements would enjoy preferred if the formalities had been followed. It could therefore be regarded as, in the opinion Héraðsóms, the Motor Insurer's Bureau considers their claim general requirement. Were heildsölulán
Claim Motor Insurer's Bureau was based on two deposit agreements with the Company's Landsbanki. On the one hand there is an agreement on 9 January 2008 to submit an account in the London branch of the defendant 1,000,000 pounds, which should jugendstil be available to be paid to the claimant and 5.55% contract interest rate on 7 January 2009, and the contract 22 August 2008 to file a 2,500,000 pound sterling, which should jugendstil be available to be paid along with 6.15% contract interest rate on 21 August jugendstil 2009.
Motor Insurer's Bureau believes that his claim should recognize the priority claim under. 112 Article. Act no. 21/1991 on Bankruptcy the winding-up of the defense. The company refers firstly to the fact that it is undisputed that the claim is due to its wholesale deposits of Landsbanki. His claim that the deposit in accordance with Article 3 paragraph. 102 Article. Act no. 161/2002 on Financial Undertakings and should have priority under. 112 Article. regardless of how it was described, jugendstil so long as the plaintiff has not waived his right unequivocally.
The District Court said that the principle stated in the bankruptcy law that he who wants to assert a claim against the bankruptcy estate jugendstil will describe it for receivers. I say while in the act of Claims must be made in writing and there is also a provision of material declarations.
"Among the things that come out in the specifications of each state is required to claim benefit of creditors. Within the limits set clause determines the claimant on how he prepares his lodging. In a letter to the plaintiff WuB defendant dated. 18th June 2009, entitled Description of the claim against Landsbanki hf. by hand Motor Insurer's jugendstil Bureau is requested that the letter be considered as a formal jugendstil statement of claims against the defendant in relation to wholesale deposits between the parties. It then stated: "The information requested on your website are outlined in the table on the next page along with data to support our claim." jugendstil Should the above text in a letter the plaintiff can not be interpreted otherwise jugendstil than on the plaintiff's claim is involved in the above letter, the plaintiff and the said table, because it was accompanied by documents confirming the agreement between the deposit and the deposits to the defense. Will not it agreed with the plaintiff to be considered so that the table in question has no independent significance in this respect, provided they meet the above letter alone did not have the conditions set out in paragraph 2 paragraph. 117 Article. Act no. 21/1991 on what to be included in the specifications. In 10th point (column) of the said Table, the following noted regarding priority claim: "Under 17 Act no. 21/1991, jugendstil we believe jugendstil the priority of the claim is in accordance jugendstil with 113 Article. "(Under Chapter 17 of Act no. 21/1991, we believe the ranking of the claim is set out under Article 113). According to the above and other matters as set out in the claims, it is clear that there is in place, with the wording in the text or by reference 112 Article. Act no. No. 21/1991, the plaintiff jugendstil makes a claim that his claims have priority, the said Law. On the contrary, he accepts that he is satisfied that the claim is covered by 113 Article. same Act. In view of the above, and the views expressed in the judgments of the Supreme Court in cases no. 303/2003 and 156/2012, will be deemed to consider the claimant claims jugendstil to be among the general requirements under. jugendstil 113 Article. Act no. 21/1991 and should recognize them as such. Valid only in this context, although it is considered that the claim ómótmælt wholesale deposits and classified as a deposit under the Act. 98/1999 in the sense of AKV. 3 paragraph. 102 Article. Act no. 161/2002. According to the clear provisions of Article 4 paragraph. 102 Article. Act no. 161/2002, Articles XVIII. Act no. 21/1991 on the treatment jugendstil of the winding-up of the defendant, jugendstil including jugendstil the impact of the claim is not filed. Not change if the legal basis for priority deposits can be found in the above AKV. 3 paragraph. 102 Article. Act no. 161/2002 but not 112 Article. Act no. 21/1991. It can not be deemed sufficient that the text has been filing claims against the plaintiff that the wholesale deposits jugendstil would be the case, as the priority innermost