Catalyst Business Finance Ltd v Very Tangy Television Ltd & Ors

Catalyst Business Finance Ltd v Very Tangy Television Ltd & Ors

The personal guarantee imposed a primary obligation on Mr Tuckwell to indemnify Catalyst for losses arising from VTTL's default. The conclusive evidence clause in the guarantee was binding as to both liability and quantum, subject only to manifest error or error of law, neither of which was established. There was no real prospect of a successful defence or any other reason to withhold summary judgment.

Parties
Claimant: Catalyst Business Finance Limited; First Defendant: Very Tangy Television Limited; Second Defendant: Richard Tuckwell; Third Defendant: Very Tangy Media Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/contract) / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment for the claimant
Legal Topics
Personal Guarantee, Indemnity, Loan Agreement, Summary Judgment, Conclusive Evidence Clause
Contract Law Banking and Finance Law Personal Guarantee Indemnity Loan Agreement Summary Judgment Conclusive Evidence Clause

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Catalyst Business Finance Limited

Claimant

Very Tangy Television Limited

First Defendant

Richard Tuckwell

Second Defendant

Very Tangy Media Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/contract) / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the personal guarantee imposes primary or secondary liability on the guarantor
  2. 2 Whether the conclusive evidence clause in the guarantee is binding as to liability and quantum
  3. 3 Whether there is any real prospect of defending the claim or any other reason for trial

Ratio Decidendi

The personal guarantee imposed a primary obligation on Mr Tuckwell to indemnify Catalyst for losses arising from VTTL's default. The conclusive evidence clause in the guarantee was binding as to both liability and quantum, subject only to manifest error or error of law, neither of which was established. There was no real prospect of a successful defence or any other reason to withhold summary judgment.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered against Richard Tuckwell for £142,936 plus interest of £8,747.78