Anyone any direction on this?

elgriff

<snip>

Kanye

What is it about that clause that you want/need explained?

It doesn't need the word "and" before "notwithstanding".

It's also hard to imagine how the relationship between the bank and the customer (borrower?) could end before the (re-?)payment of the amount due, together with interest. It unusual to compound interest on a monthly basis, but that's not really a matter for the law, if it is agreed.

elgriff

Thanks for that. Obviously I get what the clause is getting at. It a question from a bank documentation class, so I think they are looking for holes t be picked in the clause. Your last point is a good one, seems strange that it would say 'notwithstanding that the relationship of bank and customer has ceased.'

"Date of payment" would need a specific interpretation as it could mean any number of things although, clearly, it seems to refer to the full payment of the debt. It is vague enough to be construed as any payment though.

Also, the clause would need a number of sub-clauses specifying how compound interest is to be calculated, at what rate and what the penalties would be for failure to pay.

Also, just to build on the above point, a contractual right cannot continue after the completion of the contract. Since the bank and the customer will continue to have a relationship so long as the contract continues then the whole section about "notwithstanding..." seems totally redundant.

Also, from a drafting perspective, I hate the entire clause. Mainly because the clause states one party who is owed a duty but does not specify from whom that duty is owed. It is best practice to name both parties to the contract there. You'd obviously establish that in your interpretation section ("XXX Bank", hereinafter referred to as "the Bank" and "Joe Bloggs" hereinafter referred to as "the Customer" or perhaps "The Borrower" or whatever suits based on the type of contract it is)