Topic: equitable compensation

Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster [2021] WTLR 561

Judgment was handed down following a trial of a claim against a former director for breach of fiduciary duty through unauthorised remuneration. The claim was found to be established in judgment given on 15 November 2016. On 19 December 2016 there was a hearing to deal with consequential matters including the terms of order. The order made provided for judgment for equitable compensation in respect of the unauthorised remuneration.

The claimant then applied for an interim payment. The defendant objected on the basis that it was far from certain that the claimant had suffered any lo...

Auden McKenzie (Pharma Division) Ltd v Patel [2020] WTLR 1133

This was an appeal against summary judgment on a claim for equitable compensation for £13,149,479 plus interest at 2.5% pa compounded annually.

A was a director of R. A and his sister (Ms Patel) had founded R and had been sole directors and (directly and indirectly) owned all of the shares. Between 2009 and 2014, A had caused R to pay £13,763,452 against sham invoices to Dubai companies. The Dubai companies had retained 5-10% of the invoiced sums and paid the balance to A (and Ms Patel’s) personal bank accounts, to them in cash, and to third parties for the purchase of a New York ...

Daniel & anr v Tee & ors [2018] WTLR 799

The defendants were professional solicitor trustees of a trust established by the will of the claimants’ father. The claimants were the beneficiaries of the will trust, who were minors when their father died. The deceased’s will provided that the claimants’ shares would be held on trust for them until they turned 25, so the defendants invested the trust fund with the assistance of professional investment advice given by Taylor Young Investment Management Ltd (Taylor Young).

The claimants subsequently sought compensation from the trustees in the sum of £1,476,076 on the basis that ...

Barnett v Creggy [2014] EWHC 3080 (Ch)

This was a claim for an account and associated enquiries and for equitable compensation brought by Jeffrey and Peter Barnett (the claimants) against their former solicitor Stuart Creggy (Mr Creggy). The claimants were entrepreneurs in the restaurant business. Mr Creggy’s practice consisted of establishing offshore companies for clients and providing services to those clients in respect of depositing, investing and withdrawing funds held in those companies. Mr Creggy ceased to be a solicitor in 1998, but continued to provide those services until 2002.

The claimants were clien...

Libertarian Investments Ltd v Hall FACV Nos 14 & 16 of 2012

W and the defendant embarked on a project with the aim of acquiring a substantial interest in an English company, TSE, which started with the acquisition of 125,000 TSE shares in 2002 (the first tranche). In 2003 they attempted to make additional acquisitions of TSE shares, such attempts involving three of W’s companies, including the plaintiff. The overall scheme was that funds would be provided by one company, Assanzon, for the acquisition of shares for another company, Momentum, which were held for its beneficial owners which were principally the plaintiff company, Libertarian. The fu...

Novoship (UK) Limited & ors v Nikitin & ors [2014] EWCA Civ 908

Mr Mikhaylyuk (M), a manager for the first respondent, NOUK, with responsibility for negotiating the charters of vessels owned by companies within the Novoship group, the remaining respondents, owed fiduciary duties to all the respondents. M had arranged a series of schemes by which he defrauded his principals and enriched himself and others by the payment of bribes given to him by those who chartered his principals’ vessels. These schemes included one concerning vessels chartered to companies owned and controlled by Mr Ruperti (R) which R then sub-chartered at substantially higher rates...

Wise v Jimenez & anr HC12CO0367

In 2007 the defendant Mr Jimenez (J) became involved in the development of a golf course in France and gathered together a number of investors including the claimant Mr Wise (W), then a close friend of his, who provided £500,000 to invest in the project. The money was procured by means of a loan from Coutts and Co of £350,000 together with funds from two other accounts held by W. It was transferred to the account of a dormant company, the second defendant, CD Investments Ltd (CDI) set up by W and now in liquidation, and hence to an account with HiFX in J’s name in the form of €...