Clavis Securities Plc & Ors v Intertrust Management Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 3737 (Comm) (03 December 2021)

Clavis Securities Plc & Ors v Intertrust Management Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 3737 (Comm) (03 December 2021)

The claim was entirely dependent on an assertion regarding the appointment of a share trustee that was demonstrably false and had already been rejected in prior proceedings. The claim was therefore bound to fail, constituted an abuse of process, and was a collateral attack on a previous judgment. The defendants were entitled to strike out or summary judgment and to costs on the indemnity basis due to the vexatious and improper nature of the proceedings.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 3737 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Clavis Securities PLC & Ors; Defendant: Intertrust Management Limited & Ors; Defendant: Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP (BCLP Defendants)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out and/or summary judgment for defendants; costs awarded on indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Costs Assessment, Trust Law, Company Law, Abuse of Process
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Costs Assessment Trust Law Company Law 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clavis Securities PLC & Ors

Claimant

Intertrust Management Limited & Ors

Defendant

Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP (BCLP Defendants)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out for no reasonable grounds or as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment should be entered for the defendants
  3. 3 Whether the claim was brought without authority and for an improper purpose

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was entirely dependent on an assertion regarding the appointment of a share trustee that was demonstrably false and had already been rejected in prior proceedings. The claim was therefore bound to fail, constituted an abuse of process, and was a collateral attack on a previous judgment. The defendants were entitled to strike out or summary judgment and to costs on the indemnity basis due to the vexatious and improper nature of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out and/or summary judgment for defendants; costs awarded on indemnity basis.

Orders

  • Claim struck out and/or summary judgment entered for defendants
  • Claimants to pay defendants' costs on the indemnity basis