Gwembe Valley Development Company Ltd v Koshy & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 1306 (25 July 2001)

Gwembe Valley Development Company Ltd v Koshy & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 1306 (25 July 2001)

The Court of Appeal did not intend to disturb the order of 20 March 1998 as it affected Lasco; any suggestion to the contrary in the order of 28 March 2001 was an accidental slip or omission, which should be corrected under CPR 40.12 to reflect the court's true intention.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1306
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Gwembe Valley Development Company Limited (In Receivership); Defendant/respondent: Thomas Koshy; Defendant/respondent: Lummus Agricultural Services Company Limited (In Liquidation)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Amend Order Under CPR 40.12
Outcome
Application allowed
Legal Topics
Accidental Slip Rule, Amendment of Court Orders, Constructive Trust, Receivership, Liquidation
Civil Procedure Company Law Accidental Slip Rule Amendment of Court Orders Constructive Trust Receivership Liquidation

Source-derived case record

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gwembe Valley Development Company Limited (In Receivership)

Claimant/applicant

Thomas Koshy

Defendant/respondent

Lummus Agricultural Services Company Limited (In Liquidation)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application to Amend Order Under CPR 40.12

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal's order of 28 March 2001 inadvertently set aside the judgment against Lasco as well as Mr Koshy
  2. 2 Whether there was an accidental slip or omission in the order requiring correction under CPR 40.12

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal did not intend to disturb the order of 20 March 1998 as it affected Lasco; any suggestion to the contrary in the order of 28 March 2001 was an accidental slip or omission, which should be corrected under CPR 40.12 to reflect the court's true intention.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • Order of 28 March 2001 amended to clarify it applies only as against the first defendant (Mr Koshy) and not Lasco
  • No order as to costs