Hall v Cable and Wireless Plc [2009] EWHC 1793 (Comm) (21 July 2009)

Hall v Cable and Wireless Plc [2009] EWHC 1793 (Comm) (21 July 2009)

Breach of listing rules and market abuse under FSMA do not give rise to a private cause of action; misrepresentation claims fail for lack of contractual nexus; only the negligence claim survives, and only for Mr. Martin, as he may have suffered loss from the December 2002 disclosure, but the other claimants cannot prove causation as they sold before the relevant disclosure.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 1793 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Derek William Hall; Claimant: William Donald Parry; Claimant: Elaine Parry; Defendant: Cable and Wireless PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial Court) / Summary Judgment Application by Defendant
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of Defendant against Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry; summary judgment refused against Mr. Martin except for statutory duty, market abuse, and misrepresentation claims, which are struck out.
Legal Topics
Breach of Statutory Duty, Market Abuse, Misrepresentation, Negligence, Limitation of Actions, Causation of Loss
Company Law Financial Services Law Tort Law Breach of Statutory Duty Market Abuse Misrepresentation Negligence Limitation of Actions +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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Derek William Hall

Claimant

William Donald Parry

Claimant

Elaine Parry

Claimant

Cable and Wireless PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial Court) / Summary Judgment Application by Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether breach of listing rules under FSMA gives rise to a private cause of action
  2. 2 Whether market abuse under FSMA is actionable by private persons
  3. 3 Whether claimants can claim damages for misrepresentation under the Misrepresentation Act 1967

Ratio Decidendi

Breach of listing rules and market abuse under FSMA do not give rise to a private cause of action; misrepresentation claims fail for lack of contractual nexus; only the negligence claim survives, and only for Mr. Martin, as he may have suffered loss from the December 2002 disclosure, but the other claimants cannot prove causation as they sold before the relevant disclosure.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of Defendant against Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry; summary judgment refused against Mr. Martin except for statutory duty, market abuse, and misrepresentation claims, which are struck out.

Orders

  • Summary judgment for Defendant against Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry
  • Claims of Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry dismissed