LH Global Group (UK) Ltd v Henderson & Ors [2025] EWHC 2832 (Ch) (18 August 2025)

LH Global Group (UK) Ltd v Henderson & Ors [2025] EWHC 2832 (Ch) (18 August 2025)

The defendants' failure to comply with extended disclosure obligations was both serious and significant, with no adequate explanation or proper searches undertaken. The breach imperilled trial fairness and preparations. Relief from sanctions was refused, and judgment was entered for the claimant pursuant to the automatic strike out provision in the unless order.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2832 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: LH Global Group (UK) Limited; First Defendant: Ryan Henderson; Second Defendant: Travel Scholars Limited; Third Defendant: Blue Poppy Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial / Interlocutory Judgment on Applications for Relief From Sanctions and for Judgment Following Breach of Disclosure Orders
Outcome
Judgment for claimant; relief from sanctions refused to all defendants; damages to be assessed.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Disclosure Obligations, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Conspiracy, Accessory Liability, Strike Out of Defence, Judgment in Default
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Company Law Relief From Sanctions Disclosure Obligations Breach of Fiduciary Duty Conspiracy Accessory Liability +2 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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LH Global Group (UK) Limited

Claimant

Ryan Henderson

First Defendant

Travel Scholars Limited

Second Defendant

Blue Poppy Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial / Interlocutory Judgment on Applications for Relief From Sanctions and for Judgment Following Breach of Disclosure Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants complied with extended disclosure obligations under court order
  2. 2 Whether relief from sanctions should be granted to the defendants for non-compliance
  3. 3 Whether judgment should be entered for the claimant due to automatic strike out of defences

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants' failure to comply with extended disclosure obligations was both serious and significant, with no adequate explanation or proper searches undertaken. The breach imperilled trial fairness and preparations. Relief from sanctions was refused, and judgment was entered for the claimant pursuant to the automatic strike out provision in the unless order.

Court Disposition

Judgment for claimant; relief from sanctions refused to all defendants; damages to be assessed.

Orders

  • Judgment entered against all three defendants for damages to be assessed.
  • Relief from sanctions refused to all defendants.