Bonvilston Vale Limited v Amser Building Limited & Ors

Bonvilston Vale Limited v Amser Building Limited & Ors

The evidence does not conclusively establish that the payment was made by mistake or that Amser was not entitled to the sum under the contract. There is a realistic prospect that Amser can establish a debt was due and good consideration was given. The claim against Mr Hill and Ms Hitchen for dishonest assistance is inadequately pleaded, lacks credible particulars, and has no real prospect of success. Summary judgment is refused and the claims against Mr Hill and Ms Hitchen are struck out.

Parties
Claimant: Bonvilston Vale Limited; 1st Defendant: Amser Building Limited; 2nd Defendant: James Michael Hill; 3rd Defendant: Jane Victoria Hitchen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/chancery) / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Summary judgment refused; claim against Mr Hill and Ms Hitchen struck out; claim against Amser proceeds.
Legal Topics
Mistaken Payment, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Dishonest Assistance, Set Off, Good Consideration
Contract Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Mistaken Payment Summary Judgment Strike Out Dishonest Assistance Set Off +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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bonvilston Vale Limited

Claimant

Amser Building Limited

1st Defendant

James Michael Hill

2nd Defendant

Jane Victoria Hitchen

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/chancery) / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the payment by Bonvilston to Amser was made by mistake and is recoverable
  2. 2 Whether Amser received the payment for good consideration or as a debt due
  3. 3 Whether Amser changed its position in good faith

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence does not conclusively establish that the payment was made by mistake or that Amser was not entitled to the sum under the contract. There is a realistic prospect that Amser can establish a debt was due and good consideration was given. The claim against Mr Hill and Ms Hitchen for dishonest assistance is inadequately pleaded, lacks credible particulars, and has no real prospect of success. Summary judgment is refused and the claims against Mr Hill and Ms Hitchen are struck out.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment refused; claim against Mr Hill and Ms Hitchen struck out; claim against Amser proceeds.

Orders

  • Bonvilston's application for summary judgment refused.
  • Claim against Mr Hill and Ms Hitchen struck out.