Lictor Anstalt (A Company) v MIR Steel UK Ltd & Ors

Lictor Anstalt (A Company) v MIR Steel UK Ltd & Ors

Mir Steel is not entitled to summary judgment on the claims for inducing breach of contract or conspiracy as there are arguable issues of fact and law, particularly regarding intention, participation, and the availability of a justification defence, which should be determined at trial. Mir Steel's application to join Alphasteel and the administrators as Part 20 defendants is dismissed as the claims for contribution, breach of warranty, and repayment of sums paid by mistake have no real prospect of success due to the rule in Said v. Butt, the terms of the hive down agreement, and the attribution of knowledge to Mir Steel.

Parties
Claimant: Lictor Anstalt; First Defendant: Mir Steel UK Limited; Second Defendant: Libala Limited; Proposed Part 20 Defendant / Administrator: Christopher Morris; Proposed Part 20 Defendant / Administrator: Mark Fry; Proposed Part 20 Defendant / Administrator: David Hudson; Proposed Part 20 Defendant: Alphasteel Limited (in liquidation)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/contract/tort) / Interlocutory Applications: Summary Judgment and Joinder of Part 20 Defendants
Outcome
Summary judgment application by Mir Steel dismissed; application to join Alphasteel and administrators as Part 20 defendants dismissed.
Legal Topics
Conversion, Inducing Breach of Contract, Conspiracy, Summary Judgment, Joinder of Parties, Insolvency Administration, Corporate Transactions
Commercial Law Contract Law Tort Law Insolvency Law Conversion Inducing Breach of Contract Conspiracy Summary Judgment +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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lictor Anstalt

Claimant

Mir Steel UK Limited

First Defendant

Libala Limited

Second Defendant

Christopher Morris

Proposed Part 20 Defendant / Administrator

Mark Fry

Proposed Part 20 Defendant / Administrator

David Hudson

Proposed Part 20 Defendant / Administrator

Alphasteel Limited (in liquidation)

Proposed Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/contract/tort) / Interlocutory Applications: Summary Judgment and Joinder of Part 20 Defendants

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mir Steel is entitled to summary judgment dismissing claims for inducing breach of contract and conspiracy
  2. 2 Whether Mir Steel can join Alphasteel and its administrators as Part 20 defendants for contribution, breach of warranty, or repayment of sums paid by mistake

Ratio Decidendi

Mir Steel is not entitled to summary judgment on the claims for inducing breach of contract or conspiracy as there are arguable issues of fact and law, particularly regarding intention, participation, and the availability of a justification defence, which should be determined at trial. Mir Steel's application to join Alphasteel and the administrators as Part 20 defendants is dismissed as the claims for contribution, breach of warranty, and repayment of sums paid by mistake have no real prospect of success due to the rule in Said v. Butt, the terms of the hive down agreement, and the attribution of knowledge to Mir Steel.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment application by Mir Steel dismissed; application to join Alphasteel and administrators as Part 20 defendants dismissed.

Orders

  • Mir Steel's application for summary judgment is dismissed.
  • Mir Steel's application to join Alphasteel and the administrators as Part 20 defendants is dismissed.