Patley Wood Farm LLP v Brake & Anor

Patley Wood Farm LLP v Brake & Anor

The Brakes breached the freezing order by making payments outside normal day-to-day business expenditure and failing to provide required financial information. The breaches are established but, provided they are remedied, no penalty is imposed. The LLP is entitled to costs of the Brakes' discontinued application, assessed on the indemnity basis only from the date of receivers' appointment. The court declines to make the section 44 order sought, as the arbitrator's directions are not sufficiently workable to justify court enforcement.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Patley Wood Farm LLP; Defendant/respondent: Nihal Mohammed Kamal Brake; Defendant/respondent: Andrew Young Brake
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2014
Procedural Posture
High Court Civil Arbitration Related Proceedings / Judgment on Applications for Committal, Costs, and Section 44 Order
Outcome
Application for committal granted in part; breaches established but no penalty imposed. Costs awarded to LLP on indemnity basis from receivers' appointment. Section 44 application refused.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Contempt of Court, Costs Assessment, Section 44 Arbitration Act, Fiduciary Duties, Partnership Dissolution
Arbitration Partnership Law Civil Procedure Freezing Orders Contempt of Court Costs Assessment Section 44 Arbitration Act Fiduciary Duties +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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patley Wood Farm LLP

Claimant/applicant

Nihal Mohammed Kamal Brake

Defendant/respondent

Andrew Young Brake

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

High Court Civil Arbitration Related Proceedings / Judgment on Applications for Committal, Costs, and Section 44 Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Brakes breached the freezing order by making payments and failing to provide financial information
  2. 2 Whether the LLP is entitled to costs on the indemnity basis for the Brakes' discontinued application
  3. 3 Whether the court should grant an order under section 44 of the Arbitration Act to support the arbitrator's directions

Ratio Decidendi

The Brakes breached the freezing order by making payments outside normal day-to-day business expenditure and failing to provide required financial information. The breaches are established but, provided they are remedied, no penalty is imposed. The LLP is entitled to costs of the Brakes' discontinued application, assessed on the indemnity basis only from the date of receivers' appointment. The court declines to make the section 44 order sought, as the arbitrator's directions are not sufficiently workable to justify court enforcement.

Court Disposition

Application for committal granted in part; breaches established but no penalty imposed. Costs awarded to LLP on indemnity basis from receivers' appointment. Section 44 application refused.

Orders

  • Brakes to restore wrongful payments to partnership.
  • Brakes to supply list of payments and ledger entries by a date to be determined.