Findlay v Cantor Index Ltd & Ors [2007] EWHC 643 (QB) (23 March 2007)

Findlay v Cantor Index Ltd & Ors [2007] EWHC 643 (QB) (23 March 2007)

The proposed amendments to pleadings introducing claims for damages based on delayed listing/trade sale and implied terms in the Incentive Agreement had no real prospect of success, being inconsistent with the express terms of the contracts and not within the reasonable contemplation of the parties. Summary judgment was appropriate to strike out these claims and refuse permission to amend accordingly.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 643 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Lewis Findlay; First Defendant: Cantor Index Limited; Second Defendant: Cantor Index Holdings LP; Third Defendant: BGC International (Formerly Cantor Fitzgerald International)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil (employment/contract) / Interlocutory Application for Summary Judgment and Permission to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
Partial summary judgment granted for the defendants; permission to amend pleadings refused in respect of certain claims; other minor amendments allowed.
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Implied Terms, Summary Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings, Damages, Entire Agreement Clauses
Employment Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Constructive Dismissal Implied Terms Summary Judgment Amendment of Pleadings Damages +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lewis Findlay

Claimant

Cantor Index Limited

First Defendant

Cantor Index Holdings LP

Second Defendant

BGC International (Formerly Cantor Fitzgerald International)

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (employment/contract) / Interlocutory Application for Summary Judgment and Permission to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was constructively dismissed
  2. 2 Whether amendments to pleadings introducing new heads of loss and implied terms should be permitted
  3. 3 Whether the claimant can claim damages for loss of chance or delayed listing/trade sale under the Incentive Agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendments to pleadings introducing claims for damages based on delayed listing/trade sale and implied terms in the Incentive Agreement had no real prospect of success, being inconsistent with the express terms of the contracts and not within the reasonable contemplation of the parties. Summary judgment was appropriate to strike out these claims and refuse permission to amend accordingly.

Court Disposition

Partial summary judgment granted for the defendants; permission to amend pleadings refused in respect of certain claims; other minor amendments allowed.

Orders

  • Leave granted to delete certain paragraphs as unopposed.
  • Permission to amend paragraph 36.2 (lost partnership benefits) granted.