Instant Access Properties Ltd v Rosser & Ors [2018] EWHC 756 (Ch) (13 April 2018)
The court found that Mr Moore and Mr Rosser were not de facto or shadow directors of IAP during the relevant period and did not owe fiduciary duties as alleged. The arrangements between IAP, Leadenhall, and Darrencrest were not fraudulent or a sham, but legitimate tax planning. There was no breach of fiduciary duty by the directors or dishonest assistance or conspiracy by the professional advisers. The claims for breach of duty, dishonest assistance, and conspiracy failed on the facts and, in any event, were time-barred. The section 213 Insolvency Act 1986 claim also failed as there was no fraudulent trading.
- Citation
- [2018] EWHC 756 (Ch)
- Parties
- Claimant: Instant Access Properties Limited (In Liquidation); Applicants: Kevin Anthony Murphy and Richard Howard Toone (as Joint Liquidators of Instant Access Properties Limited); First Defendant/respondent: Mr Bradley John Rosser; Second Defendant/respondent: Mrs Maria Helena Gifford; Third Defendant/respondent: Mr James Bernard Moore (A Bankrupt); Fourth Defendant/respondent: Jeffcote Donnison LLP; Fifth Defendant/respondent: Mr Phillip Donnison; Sixth Defendant/respondent: Mishcon de Reya (A Firm); Seventh Defendant/respondent: Mr Jonathan Berman
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 13 April 2018
- Procedural Posture
- High Court Chancery Division Commercial Claim and Insolvency Application / Judgment After Trial
- Outcome
- Claims dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Directors' Fiduciary Duties, De Facto and Shadow Directors, Fraudulent Trading, Dishonest Assistance, Conspiracy to Injure by Unlawful Means, Limitation of Actions, Account of Profits, Tax Avoidance
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Instant Access Properties Limited (In Liquidation)
Claimant
Kevin Anthony Murphy and Richard Howard Toone (as Joint Liquidators of Instant Access Properties Limited)
Applicants
Mr Bradley John Rosser
First Defendant/respondent
Mrs Maria Helena Gifford
Second Defendant/respondent
Mr James Bernard Moore (A Bankrupt)
Third Defendant/respondent
Jeffcote Donnison LLP
Fourth Defendant/respondent
Mr Phillip Donnison
Fifth Defendant/respondent
Mishcon de Reya (A Firm)
Sixth Defendant/respondent
Mr Jonathan Berman
Seventh Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
High Court Chancery Division Commercial Claim and Insolvency Application / Judgment After Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Mr Moore and Mr Rosser were de facto or shadow directors of IAP and owed fiduciary duties
- 2 Whether directors and others breached fiduciary duties by diverting assets/commissions to Leadenhall and Darrencrest
- 3 Whether professional advisers dishonestly assisted breaches of duty or conspired to injure IAP
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that Mr Moore and Mr Rosser were not de facto or shadow directors of IAP during the relevant period and did not owe fiduciary duties as alleged. The arrangements between IAP, Leadenhall, and Darrencrest were not fraudulent or a sham, but legitimate tax planning. There was no breach of fiduciary duty by the directors or dishonest assistance or conspiracy by the professional advisers. The claims for breach of duty, dishonest assistance, and conspiracy failed on the facts and, in any event, were time-barred. The section 213 Insolvency Act 1986 claim also failed as there was no fraudulent trading.
Court Disposition
Claims dismissed
Orders
- All claims by the liquidators and IAP against the Defendants are dismissed.
- No order for an account of profits or contribution under section 213 Insolvency Act 1986.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment