Exsus Travel Ltd & Ors v Turner & Anor

Exsus Travel Ltd & Ors v Turner & Anor

The Court of Appeal held that the Master correctly applied the law on the burden of proof in accounting, was entitled to accept the Respondents' explanations and evidence in the absence of full documentation (especially where the Appellants controlled relevant records and failed to disclose them), properly addressed the issues of limitation and running accounts, and made findings of fact within her discretion. The appeal was dismissed on all grounds.

Parties
Appellants: Exsus Travel Limited & Others; Respondents: James Turner & Exsus Finance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Taking of Accounts, Burden of Proof in Accounting, Disclosure Obligations, Limitation of Actions, Salary and Consultancy Fee Recharges, VAT on Staff Recharges, Interest on Director Loans
Equity Commercial Law Company Law Taking of Accounts Burden of Proof in Accounting Disclosure Obligations Limitation of Actions Salary and Consultancy Fee Recharges +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Exsus Travel Limited & Others

Appellants

James Turner & Exsus Finance Limited

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Master reversed the burden of proof in the taking of accounts
  2. 2 Whether the Master erred in her approach to disclosure and the evidential burden
  3. 3 Whether the Master made findings of fact contrary to the evidence, particularly regarding a £100,000 loan

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the Master correctly applied the law on the burden of proof in accounting, was entitled to accept the Respondents' explanations and evidence in the absence of full documentation (especially where the Appellants controlled relevant records and failed to disclose them), properly addressed the issues of limitation and running accounts, and made findings of fact within her discretion. The appeal was dismissed on all grounds.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed in its entirety.
  • The orders of the Master, including payment of £2,975.76 and costs, stand.