Pegasus v Ernst & Young
The assignment of assets and cause of action by Pegasus to IHUK does not extinguish Pegasus's recoverable loss; IHUK, as assignee, can claim for Pegasus's loss, and the law avoids the disappearance of loss into a 'black hole' upon assignment. The appeal is dismissed and the amendment to substitute IHUK as claimant is allowed.
- Parties
- Claimant: Pegasus; Defendant: Ernst & Young
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 March 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Ruling on Amendment and Strike Out Applications
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; amendment to substitute IHUK as claimant allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Damages, Assignment of Cause of Action, Loss Assessment, Professional Negligence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Pegasus
Claimant
Ernst & Young
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Ruling on Amendment and Strike Out Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether IHUK can maintain a claim for loss after Pegasus assigned its cause of action and assets to IHUK
- 2 Whether Pegasus's loss disappears upon assignment of assets and cause of action
- 3 Assessment of loss in negligence claims post-assignment
Ratio Decidendi
The assignment of assets and cause of action by Pegasus to IHUK does not extinguish Pegasus's recoverable loss; IHUK, as assignee, can claim for Pegasus's loss, and the law avoids the disappearance of loss into a 'black hole' upon assignment. The appeal is dismissed and the amendment to substitute IHUK as claimant is allowed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; amendment to substitute IHUK as claimant allowed.
Orders
- IHUK substituted as claimant in place of Pegasus.
- Point decided binds parties at trial.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment