Sports Network Ltd v Calzaghe [2008] EWHC 2566 (QB) (23 October 2008)

Sports Network Ltd v Calzaghe [2008] EWHC 2566 (QB) (23 October 2008)

There is a good arguable case that the profits collected by the claimant from the Hopkins fight are held on constructive trust for the defendant; the balance of convenience favours an order for payment of any remaining funds into court under CPR 25.1(1)(l) due to the risk of dissipation and the claimant's lack of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 2566 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Sports Network Limited; Defendant/applicant: Joe Calzaghe CBE
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Interim Applications in Civil Litigation (queen's Bench Division) / Hearing and Determination of Interim Applications for Preservation of Funds and Provision of Information Pending Trial
Outcome
Application for preservation of funds under CPR 25.1(1)(l) granted in principle, subject to identification of any remaining fund; unless order made requiring claimant to comply with disclosure order; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Interim Remedies, Constructive Trust, Preservation of Assets, Disclosure of Information, Breach of Contract, Agency
Civil Procedure Trusts Contract Interim Remedies Constructive Trust Preservation of Assets Disclosure of Information Breach of Contract +1 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Sports Network Limited

Claimant/respondent

Joe Calzaghe CBE

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Interim Applications in Civil Litigation (queen's Bench Division) / Hearing and Determination of Interim Applications for Preservation of Funds and Provision of Information Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant has a serious issue to be tried that funds held by the claimant are held on constructive trust for him
  2. 2 Whether an order should be made for the preservation of funds under CPR 25.1(1)(l)
  3. 3 Whether the claimant has complied with court orders for disclosure of information under CPR 25.1(1)(g)

Ratio Decidendi

There is a good arguable case that the profits collected by the claimant from the Hopkins fight are held on constructive trust for the defendant; the balance of convenience favours an order for payment of any remaining funds into court under CPR 25.1(1)(l) due to the risk of dissipation and the claimant's lack of transparency; the claimant has failed to comply fully with disclosure orders, justifying an unless order for compliance.

Court Disposition

Application for preservation of funds under CPR 25.1(1)(l) granted in principle, subject to identification of any remaining fund; unless order made requiring claimant to comply with disclosure order; costs reserved.

Orders

  • If a fund representing the defendant's share of profits from the Hopkins fight is identified as being in the claimant's possession, it is to be paid into court under CPR 25.1(1)(l).
  • Unless order: claimant must comply with the disclosure order of 14 October 2008 by the specified deadline, failing which further sanctions may be imposed.