Edward Moon & Ors v Link Fund Solutions [2022] EWHC 3344 (Ch) (21 December 2022)

Edward Moon & Ors v Link Fund Solutions [2022] EWHC 3344 (Ch) (21 December 2022)

The application for a Group Litigation Order is refused. The court held that while the numerosity and commonality requirements for a GLO are met, the advantages of a GLO can be achieved through conventional case management powers without the need for a group register, lead solicitors, or a steering committee at this stage. The uncertainties regarding the RGL Claimants and the potential for further claims do not justify a GLO now. Directions for service of claim forms, generic particulars of claim, and defences are ordered instead.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 3344 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Edward Moon and Ors; Claimant: Anthony Etkind and Ors; Defendant: Link Fund Solutions; Interested Party: Sarah Louisa Spice and Ors (RGL Claimants)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Group Litigation Order (glo) / Interlocutory Application—determination of GLO Application
Outcome
Application for Group Litigation Order refused; case to proceed with bespoke case management directions.
Legal Topics
Group Litigation Orders, Collective Investment Schemes, Case Management, Damages for Breach of Statutory Duty, Mismanagement of Investment Funds
Civil Procedure Financial Services Law Group Litigation Orders Collective Investment Schemes Case Management Damages for Breach of Statutory Duty Mismanagement of Investment Funds

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Moon and Ors

Claimant

Anthony Etkind and Ors

Claimant

Link Fund Solutions

Defendant

Sarah Louisa Spice and Ors (RGL Claimants)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Group Litigation Order (glo) / Interlocutory Application—determination of GLO Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Group Litigation Order (GLO) should be made for claims against Link Fund Solutions arising from the management of the LF Equity Income Fund
  2. 2 Whether the claims give rise to common or related issues of fact or law suitable for a GLO
  3. 3 Whether alternative case management mechanisms are preferable to a GLO at this stage

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a Group Litigation Order is refused. The court held that while the numerosity and commonality requirements for a GLO are met, the advantages of a GLO can be achieved through conventional case management powers without the need for a group register, lead solicitors, or a steering committee at this stage. The uncertainties regarding the RGL Claimants and the potential for further claims do not justify a GLO now. Directions for service of claim forms, generic particulars of claim, and defences are ordered instead.

Court Disposition

Application for Group Litigation Order refused; case to proceed with bespoke case management directions.

Orders

  • Claim forms to be served within 21 days.
  • Generic particulars of claim to be served within 42 days.