Mohammed Arif & Ors v Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration Limited

Mohammed Arif & Ors v Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration Limited

The court ordered the defendant to notify store pod investors of the existence of the GLO and the cut-off date for joining, as the previous communication failed to do so and may have discouraged participation. The court refused to order the defendant to provide a witness statement regarding its insurance or financial means, finding no jurisdictional basis or case management necessity for such an order in this context.

Parties
Claimants: Mohammed Arif & Ors; Defendant: Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Group Litigation Order (glo) Commercial / Interlocutory Application/ruling
Outcome
Claimants' application to require notification to store pod investors granted in principle; application for insurance/financial disclosure refused.
Legal Topics
Group Litigation Order, Publicity of Proceedings, Disclosure of Insurance Information, Case Management
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Group Litigation Order Publicity of Proceedings Disclosure of Insurance Information Case Management

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

Mohammed Arif & Ors

Claimants

Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Group Litigation Order (glo) Commercial / Interlocutory Application/ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should be ordered to notify certain investors of the existence of the GLO and cut-off date for joining the litigation
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should be ordered to provide information regarding its insurance or financial ability to fund the litigation

Ratio Decidendi

The court ordered the defendant to notify store pod investors of the existence of the GLO and the cut-off date for joining, as the previous communication failed to do so and may have discouraged participation. The court refused to order the defendant to provide a witness statement regarding its insurance or financial means, finding no jurisdictional basis or case management necessity for such an order in this context.

Court Disposition

Claimants' application to require notification to store pod investors granted in principle; application for insurance/financial disclosure refused.

Orders

  • Defendant to notify store pod investors of the existence of the GLO and the cut-off date for joining the litigation.
  • Claimants' application for a witness statement regarding defendant's insurance or financial means is refused.