Fraser Turner Ltd v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Ors

Fraser Turner Ltd v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Ors

The Royalty Deed did not contain any express or implied term obliging London Mining or LMCL to procure a purchaser to assume the royalty obligation. The claims for procuring breach of contract, conspiracy, breach of duty, misfeasance, and unfair harm were not maintainable in law. The administrators owed no special duty to the Claimant, and the facts did not support any exception to the general rule that duties are owed to creditors as a class.

Parties
Claimant: Fraser Turner Limited; First Defendant: PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP; Second Defendant: Peter Dickens; Third Defendant: Russell Downs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/contract/company/insolvency) / Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment; Application to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Claim dismissed; permission to amend refused
Legal Topics
Construction of Commercial Contracts, Implied Terms, Breach of Duty by Administrators, Procuring Breach of Contract, Conspiracy, Misfeasance, Unfair Harm Under Insolvency Legislation
Contract Law Insolvency Law Company Law Tort Law Construction of Commercial Contracts Implied Terms Breach of Duty by Administrators Procuring Breach of Contract +3 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 6 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fraser Turner Limited

Claimant

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

First Defendant

Peter Dickens

Second Defendant

Russell Downs

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/contract/company/insolvency) / Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment; Application to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Royalty Deed contained express or implied terms obliging London Mining or LMCL to procure a purchaser to assume the royalty obligation
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants breached any duty to the Claimant as administrators
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant could maintain claims for procuring breach of contract, conspiracy, misfeasance, or unfair harm

Ratio Decidendi

The Royalty Deed did not contain any express or implied term obliging London Mining or LMCL to procure a purchaser to assume the royalty obligation. The claims for procuring breach of contract, conspiracy, breach of duty, misfeasance, and unfair harm were not maintainable in law. The administrators owed no special duty to the Claimant, and the facts did not support any exception to the general rule that duties are owed to creditors as a class.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; permission to amend refused

Orders

  • Proceedings dismissed
  • Permission to amend Particulars of Claim refused