BFS Group Ltd (t/a Bidvest Logistics) & Ors v Foley & Ors
Summary judgment is inappropriate because there is a realistic prospect of a successful defence on the targeted claims, factual issues require trial, disclosure is incomplete, and the legal principles invoked are not sufficiently clear-cut to justify judgment without trial.
- Parties
- Claimant: BFS Group Limited (t/a Bidvest Logistics); Claimant: Bidcorp (UK) Limited; Claimant: Bidvest Logistics Limited; Claimant: Bidcorp Foodservice (Europe) Limited; Defendant: Shaun Foley; Defendant: Gary Richard Taylor; Defendant: Giuseppe Ricotta; Defendant: Giuseppina Ricotta; Defendant: Paolina Ricotta; Defendant: Cristina Ricotta; Defendant: Wychwood Facilities Management Limited; Defendant: Premium Asset Leasing Limited; Defendant: Cotton (UK) Limited; Defendant: Premium Asset Finance Limited; Defendant: G. R. Taylor Accountants Limited (t/a G. R. Taylor & Co); Defendant: PCL Transport Limited; Defendant: Accessible Construction Limited; Defendant: Accessible Hire and Refrigeration Limited; Defendant: Mr Dominic Driscoll; Defendant: Mrs Annabella Burton; Defendant: Partners in Logistics Limited; Defendant: Mr Michael Neville; Defendant: Solarcrown Commercial Limited; Defendant: Mr Andrew Mikhail
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 08 November 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Summary Judgment Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Bribery, Secret Commissions, Corporate Veil, Fiduciary Duties, Fraudulent Misrepresentation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
BFS Group Limited (t/a Bidvest Logistics)
Claimant
Bidcorp (UK) Limited
Claimant
Bidvest Logistics Limited
Claimant
Bidcorp Foodservice (Europe) Limited
Claimant
Shaun Foley
Defendant
Gary Richard Taylor
Defendant
Giuseppe Ricotta
Defendant
Giuseppina Ricotta
Defendant
Paolina Ricotta
Defendant
Cristina Ricotta
Defendant
Wychwood Facilities Management Limited
Defendant
Premium Asset Leasing Limited
Defendant
Cotton (UK) Limited
Defendant
Premium Asset Finance Limited
Defendant
G. R. Taylor Accountants Limited (t/a G. R. Taylor & Co)
Defendant
PCL Transport Limited
Defendant
Accessible Construction Limited
Defendant
Accessible Hire and Refrigeration Limited
Defendant
Mr Dominic Driscoll
Defendant
Mrs Annabella Burton
Defendant
Partners in Logistics Limited
Defendant
Mr Michael Neville
Defendant
Solarcrown Commercial Limited
Defendant
Mr Andrew Mikhail
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether summary judgment should be granted on liability for alleged bribes and fraudulent payments
- 2 Whether payments to companies associated with D1 constituted bribes or secret commissions
- 3 Whether sufficient disclosure was made to negate liability for secret commissions
Ratio Decidendi
Summary judgment is inappropriate because there is a realistic prospect of a successful defence on the targeted claims, factual issues require trial, disclosure is incomplete, and the legal principles invoked are not sufficiently clear-cut to justify judgment without trial.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
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