Killen v Horseworld Ltd & Ors

Killen v Horseworld Ltd & Ors

The Master did not err in law or fact in refusing to strike out the claim or grant summary judgment. The pleadings and evidence disclosed triable issues as to whether the individual defendants requested or accepted services in their personal capacity, and whether they could be personally liable in quantum meruit. The disputes of fact and the interpretation of the documents required resolution at trial.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Heather Killen; First Defendant: Horseworld Limited; Second Defendant: Horseworld (UK) Limited; Third Defendant/first Appellant: Toby Vintcent; Fourth Defendant/second Appellant: Richard Worrall
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused for Fourth Defendant
Legal Topics
Quantum Meruit, Personal Liability of Directors, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Contract Law Restitution Quantum Meruit Personal Liability of Directors Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications

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

Parties

Heather Killen

Claimant/respondent

Horseworld Limited

First Defendant

Horseworld (UK) Limited

Second Defendant

Toby Vintcent

Third Defendant/first Appellant

Richard Worrall

Fourth Defendant/second Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim in quantum meruit against individual directors (Vintcent and Worrall) should be struck out or summarily dismissed
  2. 2 Whether the facts pleaded disclose a reasonable cause of action against the individual defendants personally, as opposed to the corporate defendants
  3. 3 Whether the Master erred in law or fact in refusing to strike out the claim or grant summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The Master did not err in law or fact in refusing to strike out the claim or grant summary judgment. The pleadings and evidence disclosed triable issues as to whether the individual defendants requested or accepted services in their personal capacity, and whether they could be personally liable in quantum meruit. The disputes of fact and the interpretation of the documents required resolution at trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused for Fourth Defendant

Orders

  • Appeal by Toby Vintcent dismissed;
  • Permission to appeal refused for Richard Worrall;