The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Jonkler & Anor [2006] EWHC 135 (Ch) (10 February 2006)

The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Jonkler & Anor [2006] EWHC 135 (Ch) (10 February 2006)

Special circumstances existed because the Secretary of State discontinued proceedings against the main alleged wrongdoer, leaving only the applicant (who had no active involvement in the misconduct) subject to disqualification. There was no continuing public interest in maintaining the undertaking, so it should cease to be in force.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 135 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; First Defendant: Joseph Oswald Jonkler; Second Defendant/applicant: Judith Spencer-Jonkler
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Application Under Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, S.8 a / High Court Judgment on Application to Cease Effect of Disqualification Undertaking
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Director Disqualification, Variation of Disqualification Undertaking, Public Interest, Procedural Fairness
Company Law Insolvency Law Director Disqualification Variation of Disqualification Undertaking Public Interest Procedural Fairness

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry

Claimant/respondent

Joseph Oswald Jonkler

First Defendant

Judith Spencer-Jonkler

Second Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Application Under Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, S.8 a / High Court Judgment on Application to Cease Effect of Disqualification Undertaking

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should order a disqualification undertaking to cease under s.8A CDDA 1986
  2. 2 Whether agreed facts in a disqualification undertaking can be challenged on a s.8A application
  3. 3 Principles for exercising discretion under s.8A CDDA 1986

Ratio Decidendi

Special circumstances existed because the Secretary of State discontinued proceedings against the main alleged wrongdoer, leaving only the applicant (who had no active involvement in the misconduct) subject to disqualification. There was no continuing public interest in maintaining the undertaking, so it should cease to be in force.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • The disqualification undertaking given by Judith Spencer-Jonkler shall immediately cease to have effect.