Pearce v (European Reinsurance Consultants and Run-Off Ltd & Ors [2005] EWHC 1493 (Ch) (12 July 2005)

Pearce v (European Reinsurance Consultants and Run-Off Ltd & Ors [2005] EWHC 1493 (Ch) (12 July 2005)

The application to strike out or for summary judgment by BDO is refused except in relation to the claim for damages for distress, which is struck out. The pleaded heads of damage (loss of value, bankruptcy costs, and other consequential losses) are not unsustainable in law on the assumed facts, and the issues are fact-sensitive and unsuitable for summary determination at this stage.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 1493 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Ronald John Pearce; First Defendant: European Reinsurance Consultants and Run-Off Limited; Second Defendant: Christopher Norman Palmer; Third Defendant: BDO Stoy Hayward (A Partnership)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment / Interlocutory (application Under CPR Part 3.4(2)(a) and Part 24.2)
Outcome
Application refused in part; claim for distress struck out; remainder of claim proceeds to trial.
Legal Topics
Valuation of Shares, Duties of Auditors/experts, Reflective Loss, Assessment of Damages, Costs as Damages, Bankruptcy Proceedings
Company Law Professional Negligence Bankruptcy Valuation of Shares Duties of Auditors/experts Reflective Loss Assessment of Damages Costs as Damages +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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald John Pearce

Claimant

European Reinsurance Consultants and Run-Off Limited

First Defendant

Christopher Norman Palmer

Second Defendant

BDO Stoy Hayward (A Partnership)

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment / Interlocutory (application Under CPR Part 3.4(2)(a) and Part 24.2)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against BDO should be struck out or summary judgment granted on the basis that it is bound to fail or has no real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the pleaded heads of damage are recoverable in law against BDO, assuming all pleaded duties and breaches are established
  3. 3 Whether the claim for distress is sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The application to strike out or for summary judgment by BDO is refused except in relation to the claim for damages for distress, which is struck out. The pleaded heads of damage (loss of value, bankruptcy costs, and other consequential losses) are not unsustainable in law on the assumed facts, and the issues are fact-sensitive and unsuitable for summary determination at this stage.

Court Disposition

Application refused in part; claim for distress struck out; remainder of claim proceeds to trial.

Orders

  • Claim for damages for distress struck out.
  • Remainder of claim against BDO not struck out and not summarily dismissed; to proceed to trial.