Gamatronic (UK) Ltd & Anor v Hamilton & Ors [2013] EWHC 3287 (QB) (30 October 2013)

Gamatronic (UK) Ltd & Anor v Hamilton & Ors [2013] EWHC 3287 (QB) (30 October 2013)

The claimants' statement of case is so seriously defective in clarity, particularity, and identification of claims and relief that it must be struck out. However, the claimants are not barred by the release at this stage, as they have a real prospect of establishing that the release does not cover the claims or is not binding due to concealment or sharp practice. The claimants are permitted to serve a new, properly particularised statement of case.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3287 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Gamatronic (UK) Ltd; Claimant: Gamatronic Israel; First Defendant: Robert Hamilton; Second Defendant: Jayne Mansfield; Third Defendant: Vox
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out and Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claimants' statement of case struck out with permission to re-plead
Legal Topics
Release and Settlement, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Breach of Contract, Misuse of Confidential Information, Conspiracy, Unlawful Interference With Business, Money Had and Received, Pleading Requirements, Summary Judgment, Strike Out
Contract Employment Equity Company Release and Settlement Breach of Fiduciary Duty Breach of Contract Misuse of Confidential Information +6 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gamatronic (UK) Ltd

Claimant

Gamatronic Israel

Claimant

Robert Hamilton

First Defendant

Jayne Mansfield

Second Defendant

Vox

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Strike Out and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are barred by a contractual release from bringing claims against the first and second defendants
  2. 2 Whether the claimants' statement of case should be struck out for inadequate pleading
  3. 3 Whether the claimants should be permitted to serve a new or amended pleading if the statement of case is struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' statement of case is so seriously defective in clarity, particularity, and identification of claims and relief that it must be struck out. However, the claimants are not barred by the release at this stage, as they have a real prospect of establishing that the release does not cover the claims or is not binding due to concealment or sharp practice. The claimants are permitted to serve a new, properly particularised statement of case.

Court Disposition

Claimants' statement of case struck out with permission to re-plead

Orders

  • Statement of case struck out in its entirety
  • Claimants granted permission to serve a new, properly particularised statement of case