Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & Ors v William Simon Fattal & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 297 (08 April 2009)

Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & Ors v William Simon Fattal & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 297 (08 April 2009)

The New Claim should not be struck out as an abuse of process because the Fattal trustees did not have the material information at the time of the 2003 proceedings, and it would not have been possible to plead a claim that would not have been struck out. The question of waiver by election and authority to consent must go to trial. The costs order should be varied so that the Fattal trusts do not bear any part of the Walbrook parties' costs, as the non-Fattal defendants' conduct justified such an order.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 297
Parties
Respondents: Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & Others; Appellants: William Simon Fattal & Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judge's orders striking out the New Claim and requiring the Fattal trusts to bear part of the Walbrook costs are set aside and varied.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Waiver by Election, Pre Emption Rights, Costs Orders, Joint Venture Agreements
Civil Procedure Trusts and Equity Property Law Abuse of Process Waiver by Election Pre Emption Rights Costs Orders Joint Venture Agreements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & Others

Respondents

William Simon Fattal & Others

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the New Claim by the Fattal trustees should be struck out as an abuse of process for not being raised in earlier proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the Fattal trustees waived their pre-emption rights under the JVA by consenting to the 1998 transfer
  3. 3 Whether the costs order should require the Fattal trusts to bear part of the Walbrook parties' costs

Ratio Decidendi

The New Claim should not be struck out as an abuse of process because the Fattal trustees did not have the material information at the time of the 2003 proceedings, and it would not have been possible to plead a claim that would not have been struck out. The question of waiver by election and authority to consent must go to trial. The costs order should be varied so that the Fattal trusts do not bear any part of the Walbrook parties' costs, as the non-Fattal defendants' conduct justified such an order.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judge's orders striking out the New Claim and requiring the Fattal trusts to bear part of the Walbrook costs are set aside and varied.

Orders

  • The New Claim is reinstated and must be resolved at trial.
  • The Walbrook parties are entitled to recover 80% of their costs by way of indemnity from the non-Fattal trusts equally; the Fattal trusts bear none of these costs.