Gowrie Holdings Limited v Keycircle Limited

Gowrie Holdings Limited v Keycircle Limited

The application to release security for costs was refused because, despite findings of wrongdoing, there remains reason to believe Krishna Holdco Limited may be unable to pay any costs award, and the discretionary balance does not justify release given ongoing uncertainties and lack of prejudice to Krishna. Permission to appeal was refused on all grounds as there was no real prospect of success or error in the trial judge’s findings or reasoning.

Parties
Petitioner/claimant: Krishna Holdco Limited; Respondent/defendant: Gowrie Holdings Limited; Respondent/defendant: Samit Govindji Hathi; Respondent/defendant: Govindji Thakershi Hathi; Respondent/defendant: Alpa Hathi; Respondent/defendant: Portside North Limited; Respondent/defendant: Laxmico Group Finance Limited; Respondent/defendant: Syri Limited; Respondent/defendant: Laxmi BNS Holdings Limited; Claimant: Gowrie Laxmico Limited; Defendant/claimant: Keycircle Limited; Defendant: London Pilsner Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Insolvency/companies/commercial / Post Trial Consequential Matters and Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application to release security for costs refused; permission to appeal refused on all grounds.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Fiduciary Duties, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Expert Evidence, Permission to Appeal
Company Law Insolvency Law Commercial Law Security for Costs Fiduciary Duties Fraudulent Misrepresentation Expert Evidence Permission to Appeal

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Krishna Holdco Limited

Petitioner/claimant

Gowrie Holdings Limited

Respondent/defendant

Samit Govindji Hathi

Respondent/defendant

Govindji Thakershi Hathi

Respondent/defendant

Alpa Hathi

Respondent/defendant

Portside North Limited

Respondent/defendant

Laxmico Group Finance Limited

Respondent/defendant

Syri Limited

Respondent/defendant

Laxmi BNS Holdings Limited

Respondent/defendant

Gowrie Laxmico Limited

Claimant

Keycircle Limited

Defendant/claimant

London Pilsner Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Insolvency/companies/commercial / Post Trial Consequential Matters and Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs paid by Krishna Holdco Limited should be released post-trial
  2. 2 Whether findings of fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of fiduciary duty affect the discretionary balance for security for costs
  3. 3 Adequacy of expert evidence on accruals figures

Ratio Decidendi

The application to release security for costs was refused because, despite findings of wrongdoing, there remains reason to believe Krishna Holdco Limited may be unable to pay any costs award, and the discretionary balance does not justify release given ongoing uncertainties and lack of prejudice to Krishna. Permission to appeal was refused on all grounds as there was no real prospect of success or error in the trial judge’s findings or reasoning.

Court Disposition

Application to release security for costs refused; permission to appeal refused on all grounds.

Orders

  • Security for costs paid by Krishna Holdco Limited to remain in court.
  • Permission to appeal refused on all grounds advanced by GHL and Samit.