Shearer & Ors v Spring Capital Ltd & Ors

Shearer & Ors v Spring Capital Ltd & Ors

The claimants' pleadings on tender raise properly arguable questions of law and fact that require determination at trial; the security offered for the cross-undertaking in damages is sufficient for now; costs of the applications should be the claimants’ costs in the issue of validity of tender; permission to appeal is refused as there is no real prospect of success.

Parties
Claimant: Iain Lawrie Shearer; Claimant: James Richard Debruyker Dawes; Claimant: Capital Cash Limited; Claimant: Jade Investments Worldwide Limited; First Defendant: Spring Capital Limited; Second Defendants: Tenon Pension Trustees Limited and Roderick Charles Thomas as trustees of The Tenon Group SIPP – RC Thomas TGS0057; Third Defendants: Tenon Pension Trustees Limited and Stuart James Thomas as trustees of The Tenon Group SIPP – Mr SJ Thomas TGS0059
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Interim Injunction, Costs, and Permission to Appeal Ruling
Outcome
Claimants' undertakings for fortification of cross-undertaking in damages accepted; costs of applications to be claimants’ costs in the issue of validity of tender; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Cross Undertaking in Damages, Validity of Tender, Security for Undertakings, Costs Orders, Permission to Appeal
Civil Procedure Contract Law Secured Transactions Interim Injunctions Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Cross Undertaking in Damages Validity of Tender +3 more

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iain Lawrie Shearer

Claimant

James Richard Debruyker Dawes

Claimant

Capital Cash Limited

Claimant

Jade Investments Worldwide Limited

Claimant

Spring Capital Limited

First Defendant

Tenon Pension Trustees Limited and Roderick Charles Thomas as trustees of The Tenon Group SIPP – RC Thomas TGS0057

Second Defendants

Tenon Pension Trustees Limited and Stuart James Thomas as trustees of The Tenon Group SIPP – Mr SJ Thomas TGS0059

Third Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Interim Injunction, Costs, and Permission to Appeal Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' tender of payment was valid
  2. 2 Whether the security offered for the cross-undertaking in damages was sufficient
  3. 3 Appropriate costs order for interim applications

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' pleadings on tender raise properly arguable questions of law and fact that require determination at trial; the security offered for the cross-undertaking in damages is sufficient for now; costs of the applications should be the claimants’ costs in the issue of validity of tender; permission to appeal is refused as there is no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Claimants' undertakings for fortification of cross-undertaking in damages accepted; costs of applications to be claimants’ costs in the issue of validity of tender; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Claimants to provide security for cross-undertaking in damages by charges over shares in Capital Cash Limited.
  • Costs of applications to be claimants’ costs in the issue of validity of tender.