Wessely & Anor (Liquidators of Laishley Ltd) v White

Wessely & Anor (Liquidators of Laishley Ltd) v White

Respondent did not breach fiduciary duties as he genuinely considered novation in best interests of company and creditors, acted on professional advice, and no material interest was overlooked. No admissible evidence of loss was presented, and causation was not established.

Parties
Applicant: Francis Wessely; Applicant: Peter Hughes-Holland; Applicant: Nicholas Simmons; Respondent: Richard White
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Insolvency Application / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Director Duties, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Equitable Compensation, Causation, Burden of Proof
Company Law Insolvency Fiduciary Duties Director Duties Breach of Fiduciary Duty Equitable Compensation Causation Burden of Proof

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francis Wessely

Applicant

Peter Hughes-Holland

Applicant

Nicholas Simmons

Applicant

Richard White

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Insolvency Application / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the respondent breach fiduciary duties by executing deeds of release?
  2. 2 Did the breach cause loss to the company?
  3. 3 Is there admissible evidence of loss?

Ratio Decidendi

Respondent did not breach fiduciary duties as he genuinely considered novation in best interests of company and creditors, acted on professional advice, and no material interest was overlooked. No admissible evidence of loss was presented, and causation was not established.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • application for equitable compensation dismissed
  • no order for compensation