Demarco v Perkins [2006] EWCA Civ 188 (23 January 2006)

Demarco v Perkins [2006] EWCA Civ 188 (23 January 2006)

The claimant is not entitled to damages representing the cost of obtaining an annulment under section 282(1)(b) because he never had the means to pay his debts in full and the only loss suffered was the loss of a chance to obtain annulment via the IVA route. General damages for stigma and distress are recoverable but must be modest and reflect the actual loss of status, not hypothetical or windfall gains.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Civ 188
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Anthony Ricardo Demarco; Defendant/respondent: Michael Perkins; Defendant/respondent: Bulley Davey (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Nottingham District Registry
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Measure of Damages, Remoteness of Damage, Duty of Care, Bankruptcy Annulment, Individual Voluntary Arrangement (iva), Non Pecuniary Loss
Contract Law Professional Negligence Bankruptcy Law Measure of Damages Remoteness of Damage Duty of Care Bankruptcy Annulment Individual Voluntary Arrangement (iva) +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Ricardo Demarco

Claimant/appellant

Michael Perkins

Defendant/respondent

Bulley Davey (A Firm)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Nottingham District Registry

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to damages representing the cost of obtaining an annulment of bankruptcy under section 282(1)(b) of the Insolvency Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether general damages for stigma and distress are recoverable and in what amount
  3. 3 Whether the damages claimed are too remote or not caused by the defendants' breach

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is not entitled to damages representing the cost of obtaining an annulment under section 282(1)(b) because he never had the means to pay his debts in full and the only loss suffered was the loss of a chance to obtain annulment via the IVA route. General damages for stigma and distress are recoverable but must be modest and reflect the actual loss of status, not hypothetical or windfall gains.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Award of general damages increased from £1,700 to £5,100 (after 15% discount)
  • Interest to be recalculated accordingly