Absolute Living Developments Ltd v DS7 Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2311 (Ch) (29 June 2021)

Absolute Living Developments Ltd v DS7 Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2311 (Ch) (29 June 2021)

The applicant failed to establish a good arguable case that the liquidator acted negligently or dishonestly in the sale of the property at an undervalue. The evidence did not support the existence of a readily achievable premium or misconduct by the liquidator. The American Cyanamid test was not satisfied at stage 1, and the balance of convenience also favoured refusing the injunction.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 2311 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Absolute Living Developments Limited (in liquidation) (acting by its Liquidator, Louise Mary Brittain); Defendant: DS7 Limited; Defendant: Andrew John Camilleri; Defendant: Charles Alexander Clunie Cunningham; Defendant: Gozon Limited; Defendant: EPG Manlet Limited; Defendant: UM1 Limited (in creditors' voluntary liquidation); Defendant: Etruscan (Manchester) Limited; Defendant: Philip Wright (t/a Pixel Bomb); Defendant: Timothy Ackrel; Defendant: Alan Pierce; Defendant: 2380 Reversions Limited; Defendant: SC Universal Limited; Defendant: Stephanie Camilleri (aka Stephanie Spencer)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief)
Outcome
Application for interim injunction refused
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Sale of Assets by Liquidator, Alleged Sale at Undervalue, Liquidator's Duties, Standing to Apply for Relief
Insolvency Property Law Civil Procedure Interim Injunctions Sale of Assets by Liquidator Alleged Sale at Undervalue Liquidator's Duties Standing to Apply for Relief

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 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Absolute Living Developments Limited (in liquidation) (acting by its Liquidator, Louise Mary Brittain)

Claimant

DS7 Limited

Defendant

Andrew John Camilleri

Defendant

Charles Alexander Clunie Cunningham

Defendant

Gozon Limited

Defendant

EPG Manlet Limited

Defendant

UM1 Limited (in creditors' voluntary liquidation)

Defendant

Etruscan (Manchester) Limited

Defendant

Philip Wright (t/a Pixel Bomb)

Defendant

Timothy Ackrel

Defendant

Alan Pierce

Defendant

2380 Reversions Limited

Defendant

SC Universal Limited

Defendant

Stephanie Camilleri (aka Stephanie Spencer)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has a good arguable case for interim injunctive relief to restrain the sale of property by the liquidator at an alleged undervalue
  2. 2 Whether the liquidator acted negligently or dishonestly in the sale process
  3. 3 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy and the balance of convenience favours granting an injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish a good arguable case that the liquidator acted negligently or dishonestly in the sale of the property at an undervalue. The evidence did not support the existence of a readily achievable premium or misconduct by the liquidator. The American Cyanamid test was not satisfied at stage 1, and the balance of convenience also favoured refusing the injunction.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunction refused

Orders

  • Application for interim injunctive relief is dismissed.