De Molestina & Ors v Ponton & Ors [2001] EWHC 521 (Comm) (16 May 2001)

De Molestina & Ors v Ponton & Ors [2001] EWHC 521 (Comm) (16 May 2001)

The claim for rescission of the April Share Distribution Agreements is struck out because the agreements are inseparable from the Master Agreement and Brunswick Agreement, neither of which can be rescinded. English law does not permit rescission of part of an indivisible contract. There is no real prospect of success for the claim for rescission, and no serious issue to be tried for service out of jurisdiction against FSL.

Citation
[2001] EWHC 521 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Maria Elena de Molestina; Claimant: Isabel de Molestina; Claimant: Harrington; Claimant: Dressage; Defendant: Alvaro Noboa Ponton; Defendant: Earth Ltd; Defendant: Water Ltd; Defendant: FSL
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Application to Strike Out Claim for Rescission and Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim for rescission struck out; summary judgment granted for defendants; service out of jurisdiction against FSL set aside.
Legal Topics
Rescission, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Summary Judgment, Service Out of Jurisdiction
Contract Law Equity Civil Procedure Rescission Fraudulent Misrepresentation Summary Judgment Service Out of Jurisdiction

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maria Elena de Molestina

Claimant

Isabel de Molestina

Claimant

Harrington

Claimant

Dressage

Claimant

Alvaro Noboa Ponton

Defendant

Earth Ltd

Defendant

Water Ltd

Defendant

FSL

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Application to Strike Out Claim for Rescission and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for rescission of the April Share Distribution Agreements should be struck out under CPR 3.4.2 or dismissed under CPR 24.2
  2. 2 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried for service out of jurisdiction against FSL
  3. 3 Whether the Share Distribution Agreements are inseparable from the Master Agreement and Brunswick Agreement, precluding partial rescission

Ratio Decidendi

The claim for rescission of the April Share Distribution Agreements is struck out because the agreements are inseparable from the Master Agreement and Brunswick Agreement, neither of which can be rescinded. English law does not permit rescission of part of an indivisible contract. There is no real prospect of success for the claim for rescission, and no serious issue to be tried for service out of jurisdiction against FSL.

Court Disposition

Claim for rescission struck out; summary judgment granted for defendants; service out of jurisdiction against FSL set aside.

Orders

  • Claim for rescission of April Share Distribution Agreements struck out under CPR 3.4.2 and CPR 24.2.
  • Summary judgment granted dismissing claim for rescission.