Future Sound Asia Sdn Bhd v The 1975 Productions LLP & Ors [2025] EWHC 384 (Ch) (24 February 2025)

Future Sound Asia Sdn Bhd v The 1975 Productions LLP & Ors [2025] EWHC 384 (Ch) (24 February 2025)

There was no voluntary assumption of responsibility by D2-D5 to the Claimant, nor any direct communication or conduct sufficient to establish a duty of care. The contractual structure allocated risk to the LLP, and imposing tortious liability on the individual band members would circumvent that allocation and the protection of limited liability. The claims for accessory liability and inducement of breach of contract failed for want of necessary pleading and legal foundation. The claim for exemplary damages failed as such damages are not available for breach of contract.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 384 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Future Sound Asia Sdn Bhd; First Defendant: The 1975 Productions LLP; Second Defendant: Matthew Timothy Healy; Third Defendant: Adam Brian Thomas Hann; Fourth Defendant: Ross Stewart MacDonald; Fifth Defendant: George Bedford Daniel
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Strike Out/summary Judgment Application in Tort and Contract / Judgment on Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application for strike-out and/or summary judgment granted in favour of D2-D5.
Legal Topics
Assumption of Responsibility, Limited Liability, Duty of Care, Accessory Liability, Inducement of Breach of Contract, Exemplary Damages
Tort Law Contract Law Company Law Assumption of Responsibility Limited Liability Duty of Care Accessory Liability Inducement of Breach of Contract +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Future Sound Asia Sdn Bhd

Claimant

The 1975 Productions LLP

First Defendant

Matthew Timothy Healy

Second Defendant

Adam Brian Thomas Hann

Third Defendant

Ross Stewart MacDonald

Fourth Defendant

George Bedford Daniel

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Strike Out/summary Judgment Application in Tort and Contract / Judgment on Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether individual band members (D2-D5) owed a duty of care to the Claimant in tort for losses arising from their conduct at a music festival
  2. 2 Whether D2 and D4 are liable for inducing breach of contract by the LLP
  3. 3 Whether D3 and D5 are liable as joint tortfeasors under the common design principle

Ratio Decidendi

There was no voluntary assumption of responsibility by D2-D5 to the Claimant, nor any direct communication or conduct sufficient to establish a duty of care. The contractual structure allocated risk to the LLP, and imposing tortious liability on the individual band members would circumvent that allocation and the protection of limited liability. The claims for accessory liability and inducement of breach of contract failed for want of necessary pleading and legal foundation. The claim for exemplary damages failed as such damages are not available for breach of contract.

Court Disposition

Application for strike-out and/or summary judgment granted in favour of D2-D5.

Orders

  • Claims against D2-D5 for duty of care in tort struck out and/or summary judgment granted for D2-D5 on those claims.
  • Claims against D3 and D5 as joint tortfeasors struck out.