Ventura Capital GP Ltd v DNANudge Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1631 (Ch) (30 June 2023)

Ventura Capital GP Ltd v DNANudge Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1631 (Ch) (30 June 2023)

The construction of the 18 January 2021 email and the effect of subsequent communications raise factual issues that cannot be resolved without a full trial. The language of the email is ambiguous, and the factual matrix is insufficiently developed. Both parties have real prospects of success on their respective cases. Summary judgment and strike out are therefore refused on all applications.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1631 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Ventura Capital GP Limited; First Defendant: DNANUDGE Limited; Second Defendant: Professor Christofer Toumazou; Third Defendant: David Lyons
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial/contractual Dispute / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Summary judgment and strike out applications refused for both parties; issues to proceed to trial.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Contractual Construction, Variation of Contract, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Unlawful Means Conspiracy
Contract Law Commercial Law Equity Summary Judgment Contractual Construction Variation of Contract Fraudulent Misrepresentation Unlawful Means Conspiracy

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ventura Capital GP Limited

Claimant

DNANUDGE Limited

First Defendant

Professor Christofer Toumazou

Second Defendant

David Lyons

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial/contractual Dispute / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 18 January 2021 email constituted a binding obligation on Ventura to subscribe £40 million for shares in DNANUDGE Limited
  2. 2 Whether any such obligation was subsequently varied or abrogated
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment or strike out is appropriate on these issues

Ratio Decidendi

The construction of the 18 January 2021 email and the effect of subsequent communications raise factual issues that cannot be resolved without a full trial. The language of the email is ambiguous, and the factual matrix is insufficiently developed. Both parties have real prospects of success on their respective cases. Summary judgment and strike out are therefore refused on all applications.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment and strike out applications refused for both parties; issues to proceed to trial.

Orders

  • No summary judgment granted to either party.
  • No parts of the statements of case struck out.