Pedriks & Anor v Grimaux [2019] EWHC 2165 (QB) (14 August 2019)

Pedriks & Anor v Grimaux [2019] EWHC 2165 (QB) (14 August 2019)

Permission to amend was granted in respect of claims for a contractual account, fiduciary duties, the Promissory Note, and the alleged 2016 Agreement, as these amendments had at least some prospect of success and raised factual and legal issues suitable for trial. The application to strike out background paragraphs...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2165 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Mr Markus Pedriks; Claimant: Ansomar Holdings Limited; Defendant: Mr Serge Grimaux
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract/commercial) / Interlocutory Applications (permission to Amend, Strike Out, Summary Judgment)
Outcome
Claimants' application to amend allowed in part; Defendant's application to strike out and for summary judgment largely refused; Second Claimant's claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Fiduciary Duties, Shareholder Disputes, Settlement Agreements, Estoppel, Accounts and Inquiries
Contract Law Company Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Fiduciary Duties +4 more

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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Markus Pedriks

Claimant

Ansomar Holdings Limited

Claimant

Mr Serge Grimaux

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract/commercial) / Interlocutory Applications (permission to Amend, Strike Out, Summary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to amend the Particulars of Claim as sought by the Claimants
  2. 2 Whether certain paragraphs of the Particulars of Claim should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant owed fiduciary duties to the Claimant in addition to contractual duties

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend was granted in respect of claims for a contractual account, fiduciary duties, the Promissory Note, and the alleged 2016 Agreement, as these amendments had at least some prospect of success and raised factual and legal issues suitable for trial. The application to strike out background paragraphs was refused as they provided relevant context and were not clearly irrelevant. The Second Claimant's claim was dismissed and permission to amend to maintain it as a party was refused, as it made no claim and its joinder was unnecessary.

Court Disposition

Claimants' application to amend allowed in part; Defendant's application to strike out and for summary judgment largely refused; Second Claimant's claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission granted for amendments to add claims for contractual account, fiduciary duties, and issues regarding the Promissory Note and 2016 Agreement.
  • Permission refused for amendments maintaining Second Claimant as a party; Second Claimant's claim dismissed.