Oyston & Anor v Rubin & Ano

Oyston & Anor v Rubin & Ano

There were material changes of circumstance justifying variation of the previous order, including the issuance of the receivers' declaration application, the judge's availability, and the receivers' change of counsel. Given the complexity of the receivership and Mr Justice Marcus Smith's detailed knowledge, it is more effective and appropriate for him to hear and dispose of the claim and related applications. The claimants' objections to the declaration application and to the allocation were rejected. The claimants, as unsuccessful parties, are to pay the receivers' costs of the hearing.

Parties
Claimant: Owen Oyston; Claimant: Blackpool Football Club (Properties) Limited; Defendant: David Rubin; Defendant: Paul Cooper
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (challenge to Receivers' Final Account) / Directions Hearing on Allocation of Judge
Outcome
Order varied; claim to be case managed and disposed of by Mr Justice Marcus Smith; claimants to pay receivers' costs.
Legal Topics
Receivership, Court Allocation of Cases, Variation of Orders, Costs, Interpretation of Court Orders
Civil Procedure Company Law Insolvency Receivership Court Allocation of Cases Variation of Orders Costs Interpretation of Court Orders

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Owen Oyston

Claimant

Blackpool Football Club (Properties) Limited

Claimant

David Rubin

Defendant

Paul Cooper

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (challenge to Receivers' Final Account) / Directions Hearing on Allocation of Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order of Deputy Master Arkush should be varied to allocate the claim to Mr Justice Marcus Smith instead of a Master
  2. 2 Whether there has been a material change of circumstances justifying variation of the order
  3. 3 Whether the claim and related declaration application should be heard together by the same judge

Ratio Decidendi

There were material changes of circumstance justifying variation of the previous order, including the issuance of the receivers' declaration application, the judge's availability, and the receivers' change of counsel. Given the complexity of the receivership and Mr Justice Marcus Smith's detailed knowledge, it is more effective and appropriate for him to hear and dispose of the claim and related applications. The claimants' objections to the declaration application and to the allocation were rejected. The claimants, as unsuccessful parties, are to pay the receivers' costs of the hearing.

Court Disposition

Order varied; claim to be case managed and disposed of by Mr Justice Marcus Smith; claimants to pay receivers' costs.

Orders

  • The claim is to be further case managed and tried or disposed of by Mr Justice Marcus Smith.
  • The parties are to seek a listing of the disposal hearing before Mr Justice Marcus Smith as soon as practicable.