Hopkinson v Hickton & Ors

Hopkinson v Hickton & Ors

The court held that the requirement for an independent valuer under the Tomlin Order is an objective one, assessed at the time of appointment. Applying the test of apparent bias, the court found that Mr Clarke's prior involvement in a later valuation of the property did not create a real possibility of bias at the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: John Brian Hopkinson; Respondent: Jane Hickton; Respondent: Jonathan Hickton; Respondent: Lee Turner (as trustee of the Godfrey John Hickton Discretionary Will Trust); Respondent: Maximus Securities Limited; Respondent: Maximus Group Limited; Respondent: Maximus 2011 Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice Petition, Expert Valuation, Independence of Expert, Tomlin Order, Apparent Bias, Share Valuation
Company Law Civil Procedure Unfair Prejudice Petition Expert Valuation Independence of Expert Tomlin Order Apparent Bias Share Valuation

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Brian Hopkinson

Appellant

Jane Hickton

Respondent

Jonathan Hickton

Respondent

Lee Turner (as trustee of the Godfrey John Hickton Discretionary Will Trust)

Respondent

Maximus Securities Limited

Respondent

Maximus Group Limited

Respondent

Maximus 2011 Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointed valuer was 'independent' within the meaning of the Tomlin Order at the time of appointment
  2. 2 Whether prior involvement in a later valuation of the same property for a third party disqualified the valuer from acting as independent expert
  3. 3 Whether the test for independence is actual bias or apparent bias

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the requirement for an independent valuer under the Tomlin Order is an objective one, assessed at the time of appointment. Applying the test of apparent bias, the court found that Mr Clarke's prior involvement in a later valuation of the property did not create a real possibility of bias at the time of his appointment, as he had not made the connection between the two valuations. Therefore, the contractual machinery was properly operated, and the valuation was binding.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the appellant is bound by the valuation provided by Mr Clarke in accordance with the Tomlin Order.