Crossroads Corporate Finance (UK) LLP v Ontario Management Ltd [2025] EWHC 1011 (Comm) (10 March 2025)

Crossroads Corporate Finance (UK) LLP v Ontario Management Ltd [2025] EWHC 1011 (Comm) (10 March 2025)

The claimant took reasonable steps to serve the third defendant within time, and delays were due to factors outside its control. The prejudice to the third defendant from loss of limitation defence was outweighed by the hardship to the claimant and the other defendants if the extension was refused. There was no material failure of full and frank disclosure. The orders extending time for service and granting permission to serve out should not be set aside.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1011 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Crossroads Corporate Finance (UK) LLP; First Defendant: Ontario Management Limited; Second Defendant: Francois Denis Marie Legrain; Third Defendant: Helmut Franz Morent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Application to Set Aside Orders Extending Time for Service and Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Service, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Limitation Periods, Full and Frank Disclosure, Discretion Under CPR 7.6
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Extension of Time for Service Service Out of Jurisdiction Limitation Periods Full and Frank Disclosure Discretion Under CPR 7.6

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crossroads Corporate Finance (UK) LLP

Claimant

Ontario Management Limited

First Defendant

Francois Denis Marie Legrain

Second Defendant

Helmut Franz Morent

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Application to Set Aside Orders Extending Time for Service and Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the orders extending time for service and granting permission to serve out should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the claimant took reasonable steps to serve within time
  3. 3 Whether there was a failure to give full and frank disclosure at the without notice hearings

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant took reasonable steps to serve the third defendant within time, and delays were due to factors outside its control. The prejudice to the third defendant from loss of limitation defence was outweighed by the hardship to the claimant and the other defendants if the extension was refused. There was no material failure of full and frank disclosure. The orders extending time for service and granting permission to serve out should not be set aside.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Orders extending time for service and granting permission to serve out remain effective
  • Permission to appeal refused