Hall v Cable and Wireless Plc

Hall v Cable and Wireless Plc

The claimants have no real prospect of success on breach of statutory duty, market abuse, or misrepresentation as these do not give rise to private causes of action. The only viable claim is in negligence, which may not be time-barred and may have caused loss to Mr. Martin, but not to Mr. Hall or Mr. and Mrs. Parry, as they sold their shares before the relevant disclosure. The claims of Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry are dismissed; Mr. Martin's claim in negligence may proceed, but all other claims are struck out.

Parties
Claimant: Derek William Hall; Defendant: Cable and Wireless PLC; Claimant: William Donald Parry; Claimant: Elaine Parry; Claimant: Peter Martin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Striking Out
Outcome
Summary judgment for Defendant against Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry; Mr. Martin's claim in negligence may proceed; other claims struck out.
Legal Topics
Breach of Statutory Duty, Market Abuse, Misrepresentation, Negligence, Limitation of Actions
Company Law Tort Law Financial Services Regulation Breach of Statutory Duty Market Abuse Misrepresentation Negligence Limitation of Actions

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

Cable and Wireless PLC

Defendant

William Donald Parry

Claimant

Elaine Parry

Claimant

Peter Martin

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Striking Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether breach of listing rules under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 gives rise to a private cause of action
  2. 2 Whether market abuse under FSMA is actionable by private persons
  3. 3 Whether the claimants have a cause of action for misrepresentation or negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants have no real prospect of success on breach of statutory duty, market abuse, or misrepresentation as these do not give rise to private causes of action. The only viable claim is in negligence, which may not be time-barred and may have caused loss to Mr. Martin, but not to Mr. Hall or Mr. and Mrs. Parry, as they sold their shares before the relevant disclosure. The claims of Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry are dismissed; Mr. Martin's claim in negligence may proceed, but all other claims are struck out.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for Defendant against Mr. Hall and Mr. and Mrs. Parry; Mr. Martin's claim in negligence may proceed; other claims struck out.

Orders

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