Crown Dilmun & Anor v Sutton & Anor [2004] EWHC 821 (Ch) (01 April 2004)

Crown Dilmun & Anor v Sutton & Anor [2004] EWHC 821 (Ch) (01 April 2004)

Although there was arguably a breach of the undertaking regarding the draft judgment, the court accepted that the defendants did not intentionally breach the undertaking and no further action was warranted.

Citation
[2004] EWHC 821 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Crown Dilmun; Claimant: Dilmun Investments Limited; Defendant: Nicholas Sutton; Defendant: Fulham River Projects Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / Post Trial Judgment Hand Down and Consideration of Undertakings
Outcome
No further action; matter not referred to Attorney-General.
Legal Topics
Breach of Undertaking, Disclosure of Draft Judgment, Contract Termination
Contract Law Civil Procedure Breach of Undertaking Disclosure of Draft Judgment Contract Termination

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown Dilmun

Claimant

Dilmun Investments Limited

Claimant

Nicholas Sutton

Defendant

Fulham River Projects Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / Post Trial Judgment Hand Down and Consideration of Undertakings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants breached the undertaking not to act on the draft judgment prior to formal hand-down
  2. 2 Whether any action taken by the defendants warranted referral to the Attorney-General

Ratio Decidendi

Although there was arguably a breach of the undertaking regarding the draft judgment, the court accepted that the defendants did not intentionally breach the undertaking and no further action was warranted.

Court Disposition

No further action; matter not referred to Attorney-General.