Jak Trude v Christopher Rajendran Hyman & Anor

Jak Trude v Christopher Rajendran Hyman & Anor

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 there is no plea or evidential basis that he acted outside his authority or not bona fide as director. However, the claimant's argument that the first defendant acted in bad faith and outside his authority is not merely fanciful and has a real prospect of success if properly pleaded. The claimant is permitted a short period to amend the particulars of claim to properly plead the case; otherwise, the claim against the first defendant will be struck out.

Parties
Claimant: Jak Trude; First Defendant: Christopher Rajendran Hyman; Second Defendant: Valcura Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Amendment of Pleadings
Outcome
Claimant granted permission to amend particulars of claim against first defendant; application to strike out or for summary judgment refused at this stage.
Legal Topics
Procuring Breach of Contract, Director's Duties, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Amendment of Pleadings, Implied Duty of Good Faith
Contract Law Tort Law Company Law Procuring Breach of Contract Director's Duties Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Amendment of Pleadings +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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jak Trude

Claimant

Christopher Rajendran Hyman

First Defendant

Valcura Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial) / Interlocutory Applications: Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Amendment of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the particulars of claim disclose a viable cause of action against the first defendant for procuring or inducing breach of contract
  2. 2 Whether the claim against the first defendant should be struck out or determined summarily
  3. 3 Whether the claimant should be permitted to amend the particulars of claim to plead a viable tort claim against the first defendant

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 there is no plea or evidential basis that he acted outside his authority or not bona fide as director. However, the claimant's argument that the first defendant acted in bad faith and outside his authority is not merely fanciful and has a real prospect of success if properly pleaded. The claimant is permitted a short period to amend the particulars of claim to properly plead the case; otherwise, the claim against the first defendant will be struck out.

Court Disposition

Claimant granted permission to amend particulars of claim against first defendant; application to strike out or for summary judgment refused at this stage.

Orders

  • Claimant to submit a re-amended pleading within a short time limit; if not met, claim against first defendant to be struck out.
  • Consequential matters to be dealt with by agreement or on the papers.