Jafari-Fini v Skillglass Ltd & Ors

Jafari-Fini v Skillglass Ltd & Ors

The majority held that the judge was entitled to find, on the evidence and applying the correct standard of proof, that the Claimant paid a bribe to Mr Constable to procure Skillglass' consent, and that knowledge of the bribe was imputable to PAL through Mr Webster, triggering a Major Default. Therefore, Skillglass was entitled to serve the October notice of default. The trial was conducted fairly and there was no procedural unfairness justifying a new trial.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mohammad Jafari-Fini; 1st Respondent/defendant: Skillglass Ltd; 2nd Respondent/defendant: Phoenix Acquisitions Ltd (PAL); 3rd Respondent/defendant: Resurge Plc (now Adeste Investments Plc)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division to Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Bribery and Corruption, Imputation of Knowledge, Major Default Under Loan Agreements, Procedural Fairness, Repudiation of Contract, Guarantees and Security, Derivative Actions
Contract Law Company Law Equity and Trusts Bribery and Corruption Imputation of Knowledge Major Default Under Loan Agreements Procedural Fairness Repudiation of Contract +2 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Jafari-Fini

Appellant/claimant

Skillglass Ltd

1st Respondent/defendant

Phoenix Acquisitions Ltd (PAL)

2nd Respondent/defendant

Resurge Plc (now Adeste Investments Plc)

3rd Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Chancery Division to Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge was entitled to find that the Claimant bribed Mr Constable and applied the correct standard of proof.
  2. 2 Whether knowledge of the bribe was imputable to PAL, triggering a Major Default.
  3. 3 Whether PAL was estopped from disputing the validity of the October Notice.

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the judge was entitled to find, on the evidence and applying the correct standard of proof, that the Claimant paid a bribe to Mr Constable to procure Skillglass' consent, and that knowledge of the bribe was imputable to PAL through Mr Webster, triggering a Major Default. Therefore, Skillglass was entitled to serve the October notice of default. The trial was conducted fairly and there was no procedural unfairness justifying a new trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed. The judge's findings of Major Default and the validity of the October notice are upheld. Costs issues to be determined separately.