Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd v James Kemball Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 33 (18 January 2021)

Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd v James Kemball Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 33 (18 January 2021)

The claim against KKK for inducing breach of contract fails because there is no evidential basis for inducement, encouragement, or persuasion by KKK that could have operated on K-Euro's will; the breach was an inevitable consequence of the joint venture, not a result of accessory participation. Further, there is no evidence that KKK intended the breach as a means to an end; it was merely a foreseeable consequence of lawful commercial restructuring. The pleaded and proposed amended claims do not have a real prospect of success.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Civ 33
Parties
Appellant/second Defendant: Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd; Respondent/claimant: James Kemball Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Court Decision on Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order granting permission to serve out of jurisdiction set aside.
Legal Topics
Inducing Breach of Contract, Accessory Liability, Intention in Tort, Causation in Tort, Corporate Restructuring
Tort Law Contract Law Commercial Law Inducing Breach of Contract Accessory Liability Intention in Tort Causation in Tort Corporate Restructuring

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd

Appellant/second Defendant

James Kemball Limited

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Court Decision on Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleaded or proposed amended claim for inducing breach of contract against KKK has a real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of KKK amounted to inducement or causative participation in K-Euro's breach
  3. 3 Whether the intention requirement for the tort is satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The claim against KKK for inducing breach of contract fails because there is no evidential basis for inducement, encouragement, or persuasion by KKK that could have operated on K-Euro's will; the breach was an inevitable consequence of the joint venture, not a result of accessory participation. Further, there is no evidence that KKK intended the breach as a means to an end; it was merely a foreseeable consequence of lawful commercial restructuring. The pleaded and proposed amended claims do not have a real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order granting permission to serve out of jurisdiction set aside.

Orders

  • Permission to serve the claim on KKK out of the jurisdiction is refused.
  • Order of Teare J is set aside.