The Official Receiver v Obaigbena [2021] EWHC 3710 (Ch) (16 December 2021)

The Official Receiver v Obaigbena [2021] EWHC 3710 (Ch) (16 December 2021)

Permission to appeal is granted on the ground that the judge may have applied the wrong legal test for unfitness and on the ground that the length of the disqualification period may be excessive or not account for mitigation. Permission is refused on grounds relating to new evidentiary challenges not raised at trial and on the judge's findings regarding the EPG asset, as these do not meet the threshold for appeal.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 3710 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: The Official Receiver; Defendant/appellant: Nduka Obaigbena
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Permission to Appeal (renewed Application)
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted in part, refused in part.
Legal Topics
Director Disqualification, Appeals Procedure, Evidentiary Issues, Sentencing in Director Disqualification
Insolvency Company Law Director Disqualification Appeals Procedure Evidentiary Issues Sentencing in Director Disqualification

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Official Receiver

Claimant/respondent

Nduka Obaigbena

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Permission to Appeal (renewed Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge applied the correct legal test for director unfitness
  2. 2 Whether the judgment was based on inaccurate or unfairly presented evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in findings regarding the existence of the EPG asset

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted on the ground that the judge may have applied the wrong legal test for unfitness and on the ground that the length of the disqualification period may be excessive or not account for mitigation. Permission is refused on grounds relating to new evidentiary challenges not raised at trial and on the judge's findings regarding the EPG asset, as these do not meet the threshold for appeal.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted in part, refused in part.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted on ground 1 (legal test) subject to redrafting, and on ground 3 (length of disqualification).
  • Permission to appeal refused on grounds 2A (new evidentiary challenge), 2, and 4 (EPG asset).