E.ON UK PLC & Anor v Safe Hosts Internet LLP & Ors

E.ON UK PLC & Anor v Safe Hosts Internet LLP & Ors

4ON discharged the burden of proof by adducing credible witness and documentary evidence that it was the true sole owner of all scheduled seized goods, having acquired them from decommissioning projects and stored them at Saxon House. The Claimants failed to produce evidence outweighing 4ON's case. The legal burden was on 4ON, but it was satisfied on the balance of probabilities.

Parties
Claimant: E. ON UK PLC; Claimant: NPOWER COMMERCIAL GAS LIMITED; Defendant: SAFE HOSTS INTERNET LLP; Defendant: 4ON 365 LIMITED; Defendant: HIGH COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial Judgment, Adjourned for Consequential Orders
Outcome
Judgment for 4ON 365 Limited as true sole owner of all scheduled seized goods.
Legal Topics
Ownership of Seized Goods, Burden of Proof, Writs of Control, Third Party Claims, Accounting Treatment of Assets
Civil Procedure Property Law Enforcement Ownership of Seized Goods Burden of Proof Writs of Control Third Party Claims Accounting Treatment of Assets

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E. ON UK PLC

Claimant

NPOWER COMMERCIAL GAS LIMITED

Claimant

SAFE HOSTS INTERNET LLP

Defendant

4ON 365 LIMITED

Defendant

HIGH COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial Judgment, Adjourned for Consequential Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is the true owner of goods seized under writs of control at Saxon House?
  2. 2 What is the burden of proof in third party claims to controlled goods?
  3. 3 Does possession or ownership need to be proved for release of goods?

Ratio Decidendi

4ON discharged the burden of proof by adducing credible witness and documentary evidence that it was the true sole owner of all scheduled seized goods, having acquired them from decommissioning projects and stored them at Saxon House. The Claimants failed to produce evidence outweighing 4ON's case. The legal burden was on 4ON, but it was satisfied on the balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Judgment for 4ON 365 Limited as true sole owner of all scheduled seized goods.

Orders

  • Hearing and applications adjourned to 30 April 2026 for consequential orders and costs.
  • All questions as to costs, appeals, and consequential orders reserved to adjourned hearing.