- 144 -
$450,000 deposit) for $450,000 of the $1,000,000 BB Loan No. 1 it
funded through its Los Angeles branch and (2) through its Los
Angeles branch had a source (viz., the interest paid by Radcliffe
to Bangkok Bank LA branch on BB Loan No. 1) for the interest it
presumably paid through its Hong Kong branch on the Interconti-
nental $450,000 deposit. Moreover, Bangkok Bank Ltd. (1) through
its Hong Kong branch had an inflow of funds (viz., the Intercon-
tinental $450,000 deposit) that was sufficient to cover $450,000
of its outflow of funds through its Los Angeles branch for the
$1,000,000 BB Loan No. 1 to Radcliffe and (2) through its Los
Angeles branch had an inflow of funds (viz., the interest paid by
Radcliffe to Bangkok Bank LA branch on BB Loan No. 1) that was
sufficient to cover its outflow of funds through its Hong Kong
branch for the interest presumably paid on the Intercontinental
$450,000 deposit.107
We cannot determine the nature of the relationships, if any,
between (1) the respective rates of interest on BB Loan No. 1 and
the Intercontinental $450,000 deposit and (2) the respective
dates on which interest was payable or paid on that loan and that
107 The record does not disclose the interest rates applicable
to or the amounts of interest payable or paid on the
Intercontinental $450,000 deposit. Nonetheless, we find it
reasonable to infer from the evidence in the record, in particu-
lar the evidence relating to the transactions involving BB Loan
Nos. 2 and 3, that the interest rates applicable to and the
amounts of interest payable or paid on that deposit were always
less than the interest rates applicable to and the amounts of
interest payable or paid on BB Loan No. 1.
Page: Previous 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011