Gable Insurance AG v William Dewsall & Ors

Gable Insurance AG v William Dewsall & Ors

Mr Dewsall and Mr Hirschfield breached their Liechtenstein law duties as directors of GIAG by permitting and failing to prevent excessive, unauthorised payments to Hogarth and for Mr Dewsall's benefit, resulting in loss to GIAG. The Hogarth loan was not a legitimate business arrangement and was not properly authorised. Mr Dewsall acted dishonestly in relation to certain payments, including those out of the Hogarth trust accounts and post-insolvency diversions. Mr Hirschfield was not dishonest but failed to ensure the board properly considered the Hogarth loan. Claims for proprietary remedies over Weald Hall failed as tracing and subrogation were not available on the facts and law. English...

Parties
Claimant: Gable Insurance AG; First Defendant: Mr William Dewsall; Second Defendant: Mr Michael Hirschfield; Third Defendant: Mrs Judith Dewsall; Fourth Defendant: Horatio Risk Consulting LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial/chancery / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; judgment for GIAG against Mr Dewsall, Mr Hirschfield, and Horatio; claim against Mrs Dewsall dismissed.
Legal Topics
Directors' Duties, Breach of Trust, Knowing Receipt, Dishonest Assistance, Tracing, Subrogation, Limitation, Proprietary Remedies
Company Law Trusts Law Equity Insolvency Restitution Directors' Duties Breach of Trust Knowing Receipt +5 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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gable Insurance AG

Claimant

Mr William Dewsall

First Defendant

Mr Michael Hirschfield

Second Defendant

Mrs Judith Dewsall

Third Defendant

Horatio Risk Consulting LLP

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial/chancery / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Dewsall and/or Mr Hirschfield breached their Liechtenstein law duties as directors of GIAG by permitting misappropriation of funds
  2. 2 Whether excessive payments to or for the benefit of Mr Dewsall were misappropriations
  3. 3 Whether GIAG can trace misappropriated funds into Weald Hall and claim a proprietary interest

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Dewsall and Mr Hirschfield breached their Liechtenstein law duties as directors of GIAG by permitting and failing to prevent excessive, unauthorised payments to Hogarth and for Mr Dewsall's benefit, resulting in loss to GIAG. The Hogarth loan was not a legitimate business arrangement and was not properly authorised. Mr Dewsall acted dishonestly in relation to certain payments, including those out of the Hogarth trust accounts and post-insolvency diversions. Mr Hirschfield was not dishonest but failed to ensure the board properly considered the Hogarth loan. Claims for proprietary remedies over Weald Hall failed as tracing and subrogation were not available on the facts and law. English...

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; judgment for GIAG against Mr Dewsall, Mr Hirschfield, and Horatio; claim against Mrs Dewsall dismissed.

Orders

  • Mr Dewsall to pay GIAG £4,957,788.52 plus interest at 5% simple per annum from relevant dates.
  • Mr Hirschfield to pay GIAG £2,327,632.00 plus interest at 5% simple per annum from relevant dates.