Illiquidx Ltd v Altana Wealth Ltd [2021] EWHC 647 (Ch) (19 March 2021)

Illiquidx Ltd v Altana Wealth Ltd [2021] EWHC 647 (Ch) (19 March 2021)

The proposed amendments to the Particulars of Claim failed to adequately particularise the confidential information or trade secrets relied upon, rendering the claim unintelligible and incapable of being properly defended. The amendments did not plead a claim with a real prospect of success and would constitute an abuse of process if allowed.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 647 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Illiquidx Limited; First Defendant: Altana Wealth Limited; Second Defendant: Lee Robinson; Third Defendant: Steffen Kastner; Fourth Defendant: Brevent Advisory Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Claim / Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Application granted in part and refused in part
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Trade Secrets, Copyright Infringement, Breach of Contract, Pleading Particularity, Amendment of Pleadings
Intellectual Property Contract Equity Breach of Confidence Trade Secrets Copyright Infringement Breach of Contract Pleading Particularity +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Illiquidx Limited

Claimant

Altana Wealth Limited

First Defendant

Lee Robinson

Second Defendant

Steffen Kastner

Third Defendant

Brevent Advisory Limited

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Claim / Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendments to the Particulars of Claim adequately particularise confidential information or trade secrets
  2. 2 Whether the amendments plead a claim with a real prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the amendments constitute an abuse of process by failing to provide proper particulars

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendments to the Particulars of Claim failed to adequately particularise the confidential information or trade secrets relied upon, rendering the claim unintelligible and incapable of being properly defended. The amendments did not plead a claim with a real prospect of success and would constitute an abuse of process if allowed.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part and refused in part

Orders

  • Permission granted for proposed amendments to the Particulars of Claim except for paragraphs 18, 28, 28A, and the annexing of ACA1 and ACA5, which are refused.
  • Parties to agree form of order for paragraphs 21 and 31 of the Amended Particulars of Claim.