Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Doffman & Anor [2010] EWHC 2518 (Ch) (11 October 2010)

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Doffman & Anor [2010] EWHC 2518 (Ch) (11 October 2010)

The Secretary of State's duty to disclose extends only to documents in possession, not to obtaining evidence or ensuring investigations; no breach of fair trial or duty to act fairly occurred; no basis for striking out or dismissing proceedings.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2518 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills; Defendant: Gregory Sean Doffman; Defendant: Martin Charles Isaacs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Directors' Disqualification Proceedings / Application to Strike Out or Dismiss Claim
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Directors' Disqualification, Fair Trial, Disclosure Obligations, Abuse of Process
Company Law Insolvency Law Human Rights Law Directors' Disqualification Fair Trial Disclosure Obligations Abuse of Process

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills

Claimant

Gregory Sean Doffman

Defendant

Martin Charles Isaacs

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Directors' Disqualification Proceedings / Application to Strike Out or Dismiss Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State breached defendants' rights to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State breached duty to act fairly in disclosure and investigation
  3. 3 Whether proceedings should be struck out or dismissed for alleged breaches

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State's duty to disclose extends only to documents in possession, not to obtaining evidence or ensuring investigations; no breach of fair trial or duty to act fairly occurred; no basis for striking out or dismissing proceedings.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Defendants' application to strike out or dismiss proceedings is dismissed