Tchenguiz & Ors v Thornton UK LLP & Ors

Tchenguiz & Ors v Thornton UK LLP & Ors

The particulars of claim flagrantly disregarded the requirements of the Commercial Court Guide by exceeding the page limit, including unnecessary narrative and rhetoric, and failing to seek permission in advance. Retrospective permission is refused. The particulars are struck out, costs of drafting them are...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Vincent Aziz Tchenguiz; Claimant: Rawlinson and Hunter Trustees S. A; Claimant: Vincos Limited; Claimant: Euro Investment Overseas Inc; Defendant: Grant Thornton UK LLP; Defendant: Stephen John Akers; Defendant: Hossein Hamedani; Defendant: Kaupthing Bank hf; Defendant: Johannes Runar Johannsson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Civil Claim / Application for Permission to Serve Particulars of Claim Exceeding Page Limit; Consideration of Compliance With Court Practice
Outcome
Particulars of claim struck out; costs of drafting disallowed; permission to serve fresh particulars within 21 days, not exceeding 45 pages and otherwise compliant with the Guide.
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Practice Directions, Costs, Striking Out
Civil Procedure Pleadings Practice Directions Costs Striking Out

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vincent Aziz Tchenguiz

Claimant

Rawlinson and Hunter Trustees S. A

Claimant

Vincos Limited

Claimant

Euro Investment Overseas Inc

Claimant

Grant Thornton UK LLP

Defendant

Stephen John Akers

Defendant

Hossein Hamedani

Defendant

Kaupthing Bank hf

Defendant

Johannes Runar Johannsson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Civil Claim / Application for Permission to Serve Particulars of Claim Exceeding Page Limit; Consideration of Compliance With Court Practice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the particulars of claim should be struck out for non-compliance with the Commercial Court Guide on length and content
  2. 2 Whether retrospective permission should be granted for particulars of claim exceeding 25 pages
  3. 3 Whether costs of drafting non-compliant particulars should be disallowed

Ratio Decidendi

The particulars of claim flagrantly disregarded the requirements of the Commercial Court Guide by exceeding the page limit, including unnecessary narrative and rhetoric, and failing to seek permission in advance. Retrospective permission is refused. The particulars are struck out, costs of drafting them are disallowed, and fresh compliant particulars must be served within 21 days.

Court Disposition

Particulars of claim struck out; costs of drafting disallowed; permission to serve fresh particulars within 21 days, not exceeding 45 pages and otherwise compliant with the Guide.

Orders

  • Particulars of claim struck out.
  • Costs of drafting particulars of claim disallowed.