Sodastream Ltd v Coates & Ors [2009] EWHC 1936 (Ch) (31 July 2009)

Sodastream Ltd v Coates & Ors [2009] EWHC 1936 (Ch) (31 July 2009)

No good reasons were shown for the fourth and fifth extensions of time for service; claimant's conduct was perfunctory and failed to pursue service with due diligence; expiry of limitation period and prejudice to fifth defendant outweigh any justification for extension; orders extending time and service on fifth defendant set aside.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 1936 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Sodastream Limited (In liquidation) by James Richard Duckworth, liquidator; Defendant: Paul Christopher Coates; Defendant: Peter Gordon Wiseburgh; Defendant: Julia Ann Hampshire; Defendant: Moshe Bar Haim; Defendant: Dan Firer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Orders Extending Time for Service of Claim Form and Service / Post Service, Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application granted; orders extending time for service on fifth defendant set aside; service on fifth defendant set aside; action proceeds against other defendants only.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Service, Limitation Period, Directors' Duties, Without Notice Applications, Service Out of Jurisdiction
Civil Procedure Company Law Insolvency Extension of Time for Service Limitation Period Directors' Duties Without Notice Applications Service Out of Jurisdiction

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 7 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sodastream Limited (In liquidation) by James Richard Duckworth, liquidator

Claimant

Paul Christopher Coates

Defendant

Peter Gordon Wiseburgh

Defendant

Julia Ann Hampshire

Defendant

Moshe Bar Haim

Defendant

Dan Firer

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Orders Extending Time for Service of Claim Form and Service / Post Service, Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extensions of time for service of claim form were justified
  2. 2 Whether service on fifth defendant should be set aside
  3. 3 Duty of full and frank disclosure in without notice applications

Ratio Decidendi

No good reasons were shown for the fourth and fifth extensions of time for service; claimant's conduct was perfunctory and failed to pursue service with due diligence; expiry of limitation period and prejudice to fifth defendant outweigh any justification for extension; orders extending time and service on fifth defendant set aside.

Court Disposition

Application granted; orders extending time for service on fifth defendant set aside; service on fifth defendant set aside; action proceeds against other defendants only.

Orders

  • Orders extending time made on 2 December 2008 and 13 February 2009 set aside.
  • Service of claim form on fifth defendant set aside.