Illiquidx Limited v Altana Wealth Limited

Illiquidx Limited v Altana Wealth Limited

Permission to appeal is refused because the grounds raised are matters of fact and contract construction best determined by the first instance judge, with no error of law or principle identified.

Parties
Claimant: Illiquidx Limited; Defendant: Altana Wealth Limited; Defendant: Lee Robinson; Defendant: Steffen Kastner; Defendant: Brevent Advisory Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Permission to Appeal
Outcome
permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Contract Interpretation, Confidential Information, Appeal Grounds
Contract Law Confidentiality Contract Interpretation Confidential Information Appeal Grounds

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Illiquidx Limited

Claimant

Altana Wealth Limited

Defendant

Lee Robinson

Defendant

Steffen Kastner

Defendant

Brevent Advisory Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether permission to appeal should be granted on grounds relating to contract construction and confidentiality findings

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is refused because the grounds raised are matters of fact and contract construction best determined by the first instance judge, with no error of law or principle identified.

Court Disposition

permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • permission to appeal on all grounds is refused