KL Capital Ltd v Townsley & Ors [2025] EWHC 2162 (Comm) (15 August 2025)

KL Capital Ltd v Townsley & Ors [2025] EWHC 2162 (Comm) (15 August 2025)

TCR's claims, as assigned to the claimant, are not barred by the rule against reflective loss because the losses were suffered as an investor induced by fraud, not as a shareholder. The Second Deed of Assignment is, at least arguably, broad enough to assign the pleaded claims. The application to strike out or for summary judgment is dismissed.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2162 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: KL Capital Limited; First Defendant: Mr Kenneth Townsley; Second Defendant: Mr Stephen Bacon; Third Defendant: Mr Kevin Philbin; Fourth Defendant: By Corporate LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Conspiracy, Reflective Loss, Assignment of Claims, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Commercial Law Company Law Fraud Fraudulent Misrepresentation Conspiracy Reflective Loss Assignment of Claims Summary Judgment +1 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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KL Capital Limited

Claimant

Mr Kenneth Townsley

First Defendant

Mr Stephen Bacon

Second Defendant

Mr Kevin Philbin

Third Defendant

By Corporate LLP

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out or summary judgment granted against the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the rule against reflective loss bars the assigned claims
  3. 3 Whether the claims were validly assigned to the claimant under the Second Deed of Assignment

Ratio Decidendi

TCR's claims, as assigned to the claimant, are not barred by the rule against reflective loss because the losses were suffered as an investor induced by fraud, not as a shareholder. The Second Deed of Assignment is, at least arguably, broad enough to assign the pleaded claims. The application to strike out or for summary judgment is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application by the Third Defendant to strike out the Claimant's Claim Form and Particulars of Claim (including the proposed Amended Particulars of Claim) and/or for summary judgment is dismissed.
  • Parties to draw up an Order giving effect to the judgment.