Wagner v White

Wagner v White

There was no genuine triable issue that Mr White caused or materially contributed to Powa's administration; Wellington would not have pursued restructuring without substantial new equity, which was not available. Mr White's actions did not prejudice Mr Wagner as surety, nor did any alleged breach of fiduciary duty by Mr White cause Powa loss. The Deputy Registrar was correct to refuse to set aside the statutory demands.

Parties
Applicant and Appellant: Daniel Maurice Wagner; Respondent: Benjamin Vincent St John White; Respondent: Stuart Grant Roden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal to Set Aside Statutory Demands
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Personal Guarantee, Suretyship, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Setting Aside Statutory Demand
Insolvency Guarantee Law Company Law Statutory Demand Personal Guarantee Suretyship Breach of Fiduciary Duty Unlawful Means Conspiracy +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Maurice Wagner

Applicant and Appellant

Benjamin Vincent St John White

Respondent

Stuart Grant Roden

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal to Set Aside Statutory Demands

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a genuine triable issue to set aside the statutory demands based on the Patel principle (bad faith by creditor discharging surety)
  2. 2 Whether the co-extensiveness principle applied due to alleged breach of fiduciary duty by creditor/director
  3. 3 Whether the creditor caused or materially contributed to the default (administration) relied on for the statutory demand

Ratio Decidendi

There was no genuine triable issue that Mr White caused or materially contributed to Powa's administration; Wellington would not have pursued restructuring without substantial new equity, which was not available. Mr White's actions did not prejudice Mr Wagner as surety, nor did any alleged breach of fiduciary duty by Mr White cause Powa loss. The Deputy Registrar was correct to refuse to set aside the statutory demands.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Mr Wagner's appeal in relation to the statutory demand served by Mr White is dismissed.
  • Mr Wagner's appeal in relation to the statutory demand served by Mr Roden is also dismissed.