Berkeley Square Holdings & Ors v Lancer Property Asset Management Ltd & Ors

Berkeley Square Holdings & Ors v Lancer Property Asset Management Ltd & Ors

Statements made by the Defendants in without prejudice mediation position papers are admissible under exceptions to the without prejudice rule, specifically the misrepresentation/fraud exception (as extended to allow rebuttal of fraud allegations) and the Muller exception, because the Claimants' case on fraud and lack of knowledge makes these facts central to a fair trial. The application to strike out is dismissed and the Defendants are permitted to amend their Defence accordingly.

Parties
Claimants: Berkeley Square Holdings and Others; 1st Defendant: Lancer Property Asset Management Limited; 2nd Defendant: John Townley Kevill; 3rd Defendant: Duncan Robert Ferguson; 4th Defendant: Andrew John Windle Lax; 5th Defendant: Byron Howard Pull; 6th Defendant: Lancer Property Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/chancery) / Interlocutory Application (strike Out and Amendment of Defence)
Outcome
Claimants' application to strike out dismissed; Defendants' application to amend Defence allowed.
Legal Topics
Without Prejudice Rule, Exceptions to Without Prejudice Privilege, Fraud, Estoppel, Restitution, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Bribery, Conspiracy
Civil Procedure Contract Law Equity and Trusts Without Prejudice Rule Exceptions to Without Prejudice Privilege Fraud Estoppel Restitution +3 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Berkeley Square Holdings and Others

Claimants

Lancer Property Asset Management Limited

1st Defendant

John Townley Kevill

2nd Defendant

Duncan Robert Ferguson

3rd Defendant

Andrew John Windle Lax

4th Defendant

Byron Howard Pull

5th Defendant

Lancer Property Holdings Limited

6th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/chancery) / Interlocutory Application (strike Out and Amendment of Defence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements made in without prejudice mediation position papers are admissible under exceptions to the without prejudice rule
  2. 2 Whether the Defence can rely on facts disclosed in mediation statements to rebut allegations of fraud and lack of knowledge
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants can amend their Defence to plead estoppel and other arguments based on such facts

Ratio Decidendi

Statements made by the Defendants in without prejudice mediation position papers are admissible under exceptions to the without prejudice rule, specifically the misrepresentation/fraud exception (as extended to allow rebuttal of fraud allegations) and the Muller exception, because the Claimants' case on fraud and lack of knowledge makes these facts central to a fair trial. The application to strike out is dismissed and the Defendants are permitted to amend their Defence accordingly.

Court Disposition

Claimants' application to strike out dismissed; Defendants' application to amend Defence allowed.

Orders

  • Passages relied on from Lancer’s position statements in the mediation are admissible in evidence under exceptions to the without prejudice rule.
  • Claimants’ application to strike out parts of the Defence is dismissed.