President of the State of Equatorial Guinea & Ors v Logo Ltd & Ors [2005] EWHC 2034 (QB) (21 September 2005)
The claims for assault and intentional infliction of harm by unlawful means are struck out as they do not disclose a cause of action known to English law on the pleaded facts. The conspiracy claim is also struck out because the unlawful means relied upon are not actionable at the suit of the claimants, as required by established authority. Leave to amend to introduce APOC5 is refused to the extent of these claims.
- Citation
- [2005] EWHC 2034
- Parties
- First Claimant: Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo; Second Claimant: The Republic of Equatorial Guinea; First Defendant: Logo Limited; Second Defendant: Systems Design Limited; Third Defendant: Greg Wales; Fourth Defendant: Simon Francis Mann; Fifth Defendant: Eli Calil; Sixth Defendant: Severo Moto
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 21 September 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Strike Out Application and Application for Leave to Amend / Interlocutory (pre Trial)
- Outcome
- Claims for assault and intentional infliction of harm struck out; conspiracy claim struck out; leave to amend refused as to these claims.
- Legal Topics
- Civil Conspiracy, Assault, Intentional Infliction of Harm, Unlawful Means, Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Foreign State Immunity, Damages, Injunctions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo
First Claimant
The Republic of Equatorial Guinea
Second Claimant
Logo Limited
First Defendant
Systems Design Limited
Second Defendant
Greg Wales
Third Defendant
Simon Francis Mann
Fourth Defendant
Eli Calil
Fifth Defendant
Severo Moto
Sixth Defendant
Procedural Posture
Strike Out Application and Application for Leave to Amend / Interlocutory (pre Trial)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the particulars of claim (APOC5) disclose a reasonable cause of action for conspiracy, assault, or intentional infliction of harm by unlawful means;
- 2 Whether the claims for assault and intentional infliction of harm are sustainable in law;
- 3 Whether the unlawful means alleged in the conspiracy claim must be actionable at the suit of the claimants;
Ratio Decidendi
The claims for assault and intentional infliction of harm by unlawful means are struck out as they do not disclose a cause of action known to English law on the pleaded facts. The conspiracy claim is also struck out because the unlawful means relied upon are not actionable at the suit of the claimants, as required by established authority. Leave to amend to introduce APOC5 is refused to the extent of these claims.
Court Disposition
Claims for assault and intentional infliction of harm struck out; conspiracy claim struck out; leave to amend refused as to these claims.
Orders
- Claims for assault and intentional infliction of harm by unlawful means are struck out.
- Conspiracy claim is struck out for lack of actionable unlawful means.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment