De Sena & Anor v Notaro & Ors [2020] EWHC 1031 (Ch) (01 May 2020)

De Sena & Anor v Notaro & Ors [2020] EWHC 1031 (Ch) (01 May 2020)

The claimants failed to prove undue influence, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, or actionable negligence against any defendant. The demerger was a commercial transaction freely negotiated, and the defendants owed no relevant duties to the claimants beyond those discharged. No relief is granted.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1031 (Ch)
Parties
First Claimant: Carmela De Sena; Second Claimant: Meltor Developments Limited; First Defendant: Joseph Notaro; Second Defendant: S Notaro Group Limited; Third Defendant: Bishop Fleming (a firm); Fourth Defendant: Davies and Partners Solicitors (a firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Corporate Demerger Dispute / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Undue Influence, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Negligence, Unjust Enrichment, Corporate Demerger, Shareholder Rights
Company Law Equity Contract Law Tort Law Undue Influence Breach of Fiduciary Duty Negligence Unjust Enrichment +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carmela De Sena

First Claimant

Meltor Developments Limited

Second Claimant

Joseph Notaro

First Defendant

S Notaro Group Limited

Second Defendant

Bishop Fleming (a firm)

Third Defendant

Davies and Partners Solicitors (a firm)

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Corporate Demerger Dispute / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the demerger and acquisition of shares was procured by undue influence
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant breached fiduciary duties to the first claimant
  3. 3 Whether the second defendant was unjustly enriched

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to prove undue influence, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, or actionable negligence against any defendant. The demerger was a commercial transaction freely negotiated, and the defendants owed no relevant duties to the claimants beyond those discharged. No relief is granted.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • No relief granted to claimants
  • No setting aside of demerger