Patley Wood Farm LLP v Brake & Anor [2014] EWHC 4499 (Ch) (19 December 2014)

Patley Wood Farm LLP v Brake & Anor [2014] EWHC 4499 (Ch) (19 December 2014)

The Brakes breached the freezing order by making unauthorised payments and failing to provide required financial information; the LLP is entitled to its costs of the Brakes' discontinued application, with indemnity costs from the date of receivers' appointment; the court declines to make an order under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to enforce the arbitrator's directions as they are currently unworkable and unduly disadvantage the Brakes in the sale process.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 4499 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Patley Wood Farm LLP; Defendant/respondent: Nihal Mohammed Kamal Brake; Defendant/respondent: Andrew Young Brake
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2014
Procedural Posture
High Court Chancery Division Proceedings (applications in Partnership Dispute) / Judgment on Multiple Interlocutory Applications
Outcome
Application for committal granted in respect of breaches but no penalty imposed if breaches remedied; LLP awarded costs of Brakes' discontinued application, with indemnity costs from date of receivers' appointment; application for section 44 order refused.
Legal Topics
Section 44 Arbitration Act 1996, Freezing Orders, Contempt of Court, Costs Orders, Fiduciary Duties, Winding Up of Partnership
Arbitration Partnership Law Civil Procedure Section 44 Arbitration Act 1996 Freezing Orders Contempt of Court Costs Orders Fiduciary Duties +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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patley Wood Farm LLP

Claimant/applicant

Nihal Mohammed Kamal Brake

Defendant/respondent

Andrew Young Brake

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

High Court Chancery Division Proceedings (applications in Partnership Dispute) / Judgment on Multiple Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Brakes breached the freezing order and should be committed for contempt
  2. 2 Whether the LLP is entitled to indemnity costs for the Brakes' discontinued application
  3. 3 Whether the court should make an order under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to enforce arbitral directions

Ratio Decidendi

The Brakes breached the freezing order by making unauthorised payments and failing to provide required financial information; the LLP is entitled to its costs of the Brakes' discontinued application, with indemnity costs from the date of receivers' appointment; the court declines to make an order under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to enforce the arbitrator's directions as they are currently unworkable and unduly disadvantage the Brakes in the sale process.

Court Disposition

Application for committal granted in respect of breaches but no penalty imposed if breaches remedied; LLP awarded costs of Brakes' discontinued application, with indemnity costs from date of receivers' appointment; application for section 44 order refused.

Orders

  • Brakes to pay LLP's costs of discontinued application, with indemnity costs from date of receivers' appointment
  • Brakes to restore wrongful payments to the partnership and supply required financial information by a date to be determined