Trude v Hyman & Anor [2023] EWHC 1703 (Ch) (07 July 2023)

Trude v Hyman & Anor [2023] EWHC 1703 (Ch) (07 July 2023)

The particulars of claim as pleaded do not disclose a viable cause of action against the first defendant for procuring or inducing breach of contract, as they fail to plead facts showing bad faith, lack of authority, or the necessary knowledge and intention. However, the claimant should be permitted to amend the claim to attempt to plead such a case, as the argument is not merely fanciful and has a real prospect of success if properly pleaded.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1703 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Jak Trude; First Defendant: Christopher Rajendran Hyman; Second Defendant: Valcura Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil (business and Property Courts) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out/summary Judgment and Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Claim against first defendant not struck out at this stage; summary judgment refused; permission granted to amend particulars of claim within a short time limit.
Legal Topics
Procuring Breach of Contract, Director's Duties, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Implied Duty of Good Faith
Contract Law Tort Law Company Law Procuring Breach of Contract Director's Duties Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Implied Duty of Good Faith

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jak Trude

Claimant

Christopher Rajendran Hyman

First Defendant

Valcura Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (business and Property Courts) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out/summary Judgment and Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defendant can be liable in tort for inducing or procuring the company's breach of contract
  2. 2 Whether the pleadings disclose a viable cause of action against the first defendant
  3. 3 Whether the claimant should be permitted to amend the particulars of claim

Ratio Decidendi

The particulars of claim as pleaded do not disclose a viable cause of action against the first defendant for procuring or inducing breach of contract, as they fail to plead facts showing bad faith, lack of authority, or the necessary knowledge and intention. However, the claimant should be permitted to amend the claim to attempt to plead such a case, as the argument is not merely fanciful and has a real prospect of success if properly pleaded.

Court Disposition

Claim against first defendant not struck out at this stage; summary judgment refused; permission granted to amend particulars of claim within a short time limit.

Orders

  • Claimant to serve a re-amended particulars of claim within a short time limit, failing which the claim against the first defendant will be struck out.
  • Consequential matters to be dealt with on the papers if not agreed.