Barrowfen Properties v Patel & Ors [2020] EWHC 2536 (Ch) (24 September 2020)

Barrowfen Properties v Patel & Ors [2020] EWHC 2536 (Ch) (24 September 2020)

The court found a very strong prima facie case that Girish Patel committed fraudulent and dishonest breaches of his statutory duties as director, including forging documents and manipulating company registers to maintain personal control. These actions engaged the iniquity exception, defeating legal professional privilege and entitling Barrowfen to disclosure of relevant documents. Documents created under a joint retainer could not be withheld from Barrowfen, and any redactions must be explained under PD51U, paragraph 16.2.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2536 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Barrowfen Properties Ltd; First Defendant: Girish Dahyabhai Patel; Second Defendant: Stevens & Bolton LLP; Third Defendant: Barrowfen Properties II Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Disclosure Application (interlocutory) / Judgment on Application for Disclosure Under Practice Direction 51 U
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Iniquity Exception, Directors' Duties, Forgery, Disclosure, Joint Retainer, Fraud, Litigation Privilege
Company Law Civil Procedure Trusts and Equity Legal Professional Privilege Iniquity Exception Directors' Duties Forgery Disclosure +3 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barrowfen Properties Ltd

Claimant

Girish Dahyabhai Patel

First Defendant

Stevens & Bolton LLP

Second Defendant

Barrowfen Properties II Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Disclosure Application (interlocutory) / Judgment on Application for Disclosure Under Practice Direction 51 U

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the iniquity exception to legal professional privilege applies to documents withheld by defendants
  2. 2 Whether documents created under a joint retainer are privileged as between joint clients
  3. 3 Whether breaches of directors' statutory duties involving fraud, dishonesty, or sharp practice engage the iniquity exception

Ratio Decidendi

The court found a very strong prima facie case that Girish Patel committed fraudulent and dishonest breaches of his statutory duties as director, including forging documents and manipulating company registers to maintain personal control. These actions engaged the iniquity exception, defeating legal professional privilege and entitling Barrowfen to disclosure of relevant documents. Documents created under a joint retainer could not be withheld from Barrowfen, and any redactions must be explained under PD51U, paragraph 16.2.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Defendants to disclose documents previously withheld on grounds of privilege under the iniquity exception
  • Defendants to serve revised Disclosure Certificates and Extended Disclosure Lists