Chancery Client Partners Ltd & Ors v MRC 957 Ltd & Ors [2016] EWHC 2142 (Ch) (06 September 2016)

Chancery Client Partners Ltd & Ors v MRC 957 Ltd & Ors [2016] EWHC 2142 (Ch) (06 September 2016)

Rescission is not available against innocent parties to the arrangements implementing the tax schemes, as the law only allows rescission against the party to the contract tainted by bribery or undue influence. The claimants' remedy, if any, lies in damages against the agent or briber, not in setting aside the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2142 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Chancery Client Partners Limited; Claimant: Bank Charge Refunds Limited; Claimant: Stephen Sean Fielding; Claimant: J & L Rental Limited; Defendant: MRC 957 Limited; Defendant: Sonia Iraseme Coyle; Defendant: The Estate of Mark Robert Coyle Deceased; Defendant: The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs; Defendant: Christopher McMahon; Defendant: David Donovan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial on Rescission Claims
Outcome
Rescission claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Bribery and Secret Commissions, Rescission, Undue Influence, Common Mistake, Tax Avoidance Schemes
Equity Contract Law Commercial Law Bribery and Secret Commissions Rescission Undue Influence Common Mistake Tax Avoidance Schemes

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chancery Client Partners Limited

Claimant

Bank Charge Refunds Limited

Claimant

Stephen Sean Fielding

Claimant

J & L Rental Limited

Claimant

MRC 957 Limited

Defendant

Sonia Iraseme Coyle

Defendant

The Estate of Mark Robert Coyle Deceased

Defendant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs

Defendant

Christopher McMahon

Defendant

David Donovan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial on Rescission Claims

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are entitled to rescind or set aside tax mitigation scheme arrangements for bribery, undue influence, or common mistake

Ratio Decidendi

Rescission is not available against innocent parties to the arrangements implementing the tax schemes, as the law only allows rescission against the party to the contract tainted by bribery or undue influence. The claimants' remedy, if any, lies in damages against the agent or briber, not in setting aside the implementing arrangements. The requirements for rescission based on common mistake are not met, as the alleged mistakes do not render performance impossible.

Court Disposition

Rescission claims dismissed

Orders

  • Rescission claims by the claimants are dismissed in accordance with the agreed order.