UCP Plc v Nectrus Ltd
UCP's claim is not barred by the reflective loss principle because it was not a shareholder at the time the claim was made; the loss suffered is direct and not reflective. Legal costs incurred in mitigation are recoverable as reasonable expenses. Equitable set-off is permitted for distributions and Manx Court costs against the judgment debt.
- Parties
- Claimant: UCP PLC; Defendant: Nectrus Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 29 November 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Claim / Quantum Assessment After Liability Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for UCP PLC against Nectrus Limited
- Legal Topics
- Reflective Loss, Breach of Investment Management Agreement, Mitigation of Loss, Recovery of Legal Costs, Set Off
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
UCP PLC
Claimant
Nectrus Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Quantum Assessment After Liability Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether UCP's claim is barred by the reflective loss principle
- 2 Quantum of loss suffered by UCP due to Nectrus's breach
- 3 Recoverability of legal costs incurred in mitigation
Ratio Decidendi
UCP's claim is not barred by the reflective loss principle because it was not a shareholder at the time the claim was made; the loss suffered is direct and not reflective. Legal costs incurred in mitigation are recoverable as reasonable expenses. Equitable set-off is permitted for distributions and Manx Court costs against the judgment debt.
Court Disposition
Judgment for UCP PLC against Nectrus Limited
Orders
- Nectrus to pay UCP £5,837,920.37 for Lost Deposits
- Nectrus to pay UCP £1,934,989 for recovery legal costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment