Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster & Ors

Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster & Ors

The remuneration order made on 19 December 2016 was effective and binding, reflecting ITC's election for equitable compensation as a remedy for loss resulting from unauthorised remuneration. ITC cannot now seek to substitute a different remedy unless the order is set aside, which has not been sought or justified. The order should be sealed.

Parties
Claimant: Interactive Technology Corporation Limited; First Defendant: Jonathan Ferster; Second Defendant: World Online Software N.V.; Third Defendant: Carmel Media Group N.V.; Fourth Defendant: Data Traffic Solutions Limited; Fifth Defendant: Four Seasons Advertising Limited; Sixth Defendant: Four Seasons Media Limited; Seventh Defendant: Four Seasons Technology Limited; Eighth Defendant: Interactive Technology Corporation (Europe) Limited; Ninth Defendant: Lanesborough Investments Limited; Tenth Defendant: Lanesborough Media Limited; Eleventh Defendant: Lanesborough Technology Limited; Twelfth Defendant: Peaklink Limited; Thirteenth Defendant: Woodville Limited; Fourteenth Defendant: World Online Software Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Consequential Hearing
Outcome
Remuneration order to be sealed; ITC's application for a new draft order refused.
Legal Topics
Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Equitable Compensation, Election of Remedies, Directors' Duties
Equity Company Law Breach of Fiduciary Duty Equitable Compensation Election of Remedies Directors' Duties

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Interactive Technology Corporation Limited

Claimant

Jonathan Ferster

First Defendant

World Online Software N.V.

Second Defendant

Carmel Media Group N.V.

Third Defendant

Data Traffic Solutions Limited

Fourth Defendant

Four Seasons Advertising Limited

Fifth Defendant

Four Seasons Media Limited

Sixth Defendant

Four Seasons Technology Limited

Seventh Defendant

Interactive Technology Corporation (Europe) Limited

Eighth Defendant

Lanesborough Investments Limited

Ninth Defendant

Lanesborough Media Limited

Tenth Defendant

Lanesborough Technology Limited

Eleventh Defendant

Peaklink Limited

Twelfth Defendant

Woodville Limited

Thirteenth Defendant

World Online Software Limited

Fourteenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Consequential Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the remuneration order made on 19 December 2016 was effective and binding
  2. 2 Interpretation of 'equitable compensation' in the context of unauthorised remuneration
  3. 3 Whether ITC could change its election of remedy after the order was made

Ratio Decidendi

The remuneration order made on 19 December 2016 was effective and binding, reflecting ITC's election for equitable compensation as a remedy for loss resulting from unauthorised remuneration. ITC cannot now seek to substitute a different remedy unless the order is set aside, which has not been sought or justified. The order should be sealed.

Court Disposition

Remuneration order to be sealed; ITC's application for a new draft order refused.

Orders

  • Remuneration order pronounced on 19 December 2016 to be sealed.