Granville Technology Group Ltd v Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 3271 (Comm) (22 December 2022)

Granville Technology Group Ltd v Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 3271 (Comm) (22 December 2022)

The court held that the equitable jurisdiction to award compound interest is not engaged in this case because there is no allegation or pleading of fraud or fiduciary relationship, and deliberate concealment alone is insufficient. The claimants' pleadings do not establish that money was obtained and retained by fraud, nor that the concealment caused the defendants to obtain and retain a fund for their own benefit. Therefore, the claim for compound interest in equity must be struck out or dismissed by summary judgment.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 3271 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Granville Technology Group Limited (in liquidation); Claimant: VMT Limited (in liquidation); Claimant: OT Computers Limited (in liquidation); Defendant: Innolux Corporation; Defendant: Chunghwa Picture Tubes Limited; Defendant: LG Display Co. Limited; Defendant: LG Display Taiwan Co. Ltd; Defendant: Samsung Electronics Co. Limited; Defendant: Samsung Electronics Taiwan Co. Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim (follow on Damages) / Application for Strike Out/summary Judgment on Claim for Compound Interest in Equity
Outcome
Application granted; claim for compound interest in equity struck out or dismissed by summary judgment.
Legal Topics
Compound Interest, Equitable Jurisdiction, Cartel Damages, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Competition Law Restitution Civil Procedure Compound Interest Equitable Jurisdiction Cartel Damages Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications

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 3 Authorities cited 30 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Granville Technology Group Limited (in liquidation)

Claimant

VMT Limited (in liquidation)

Claimant

OT Computers Limited (in liquidation)

Claimant

Innolux Corporation

Defendant

Chunghwa Picture Tubes Limited

Defendant

LG Display Co. Limited

Defendant

LG Display Taiwan Co. Ltd

Defendant

Samsung Electronics Co. Limited

Defendant

Samsung Electronics Taiwan Co. Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim (follow on Damages) / Application for Strike Out/summary Judgment on Claim for Compound Interest in Equity

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court's equitable jurisdiction to award compound interest is engaged in cartel damages claims absent fraud or fiduciary relationship
  2. 2 Whether deliberate concealment suffices to invoke equitable jurisdiction for compound interest

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the equitable jurisdiction to award compound interest is not engaged in this case because there is no allegation or pleading of fraud or fiduciary relationship, and deliberate concealment alone is insufficient. The claimants' pleadings do not establish that money was obtained and retained by fraud, nor that the concealment caused the defendants to obtain and retain a fund for their own benefit. Therefore, the claim for compound interest in equity must be struck out or dismissed by summary judgment.

Court Disposition

Application granted; claim for compound interest in equity struck out or dismissed by summary judgment.

Orders

  • Offending parts of the pleading relating to compound interest in equity are struck out or, alternatively, summary judgment is granted against the claim for compound interest in equity.