Nicholson v Hardy

The s.212 Application fails to plead a legally identifiable duty, breach, and loss, seeks an investigation rather than a claim, and is unsupported by evidence. The liquidator owes no duty to share legal advice or pursue claims without funding or legal merit. The application is an abuse of process and has no realistic prospect of success.

Parties: Applicant: Nicholas William Nicholson; Respondent: Mark Gregory Hardy
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 21 May 2021
Procedural Posture: Insolvency Misfeasance Application / Strike Out Application and Summary Judgment
Outcome: Application struck out; summary judgment would have been granted if necessary.
Legal Topics: Liquidator Duties, Misfeasance, Abuse of Process, Summary Judgment, Mandatory Set Off

Insolvency Company Law Liquidator Duties Misfeasance Abuse of Process Summary Judgment Mandatory Set Off

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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Nicholas William Nicholson

Applicant

Mark Gregory Hardy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Insolvency Misfeasance Application / Strike Out Application and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the s.212 Application discloses reasonable grounds for bringing a misfeasance claim against the liquidator
2 Whether the application is an abuse of court process
3 Whether summary judgment should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application struck out; summary judgment would have been granted if necessary.

Orders

The s.212 Application is struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (b).
Summary judgment would alternatively have been granted in favour of Mr Nicholson.